Poor conservatives, I don't get it. Righties please explain.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Perception is reality....or something.

Yes, but people don't usually say that positively.

[dead0man]

Well yeah

But my point stands, whether it's true or not that Democrats hate guns (and certainly many do), many people that enjoy the hobby of guns will not vote for one.  Not voting for a Dem might not be in their best interest, probably impossible to say.  The Dem they chose not to vote for probably won't help take the guns even if he/she wins.  But it's not like it's been a generation since you guys went after guns.  It wasn't that long ago that Dems were passing idiotic anti-gun laws.  The smarter Dems can distance themselves from the issue, but the lesser of you will always remind us of it.

[lowtech redneck]

I also think the more liberals complain about "poor people voting against their best interests", the more some poor people will vote Republican.

And the same goes for assuming nefarious motives instead of considering the issue from another's point of view (not that I've never done the same thing).

The whole 'what's the matter with Kansas' arguement is fallacious, anyway; if social issues were so unimportant, then the Democrats would have no reason not to adopt the social issues of those voting against them in order to try and advance their fiscal agenda.  The truth is, the Democratic and Republican coalitions simply appeal to different 'social issues' voters.

[Gustaf]

I also think the more liberals complain about "poor people voting against their best interests", the more some poor people will vote Republican.

And the same goes for assuming nefarious motives instead of considering the issue from another's point of view (not that I've never done the same thing).

The whole 'what's the matter with Kansas' arguement is fallacious, anyway; if social issues were so unimportant, then the Democrats would have no reason not to adopt the social issues of those voting against them in order to try and advance their fiscal agenda.  The truth is, the Democratic and Republican coalitions simply appeal to different 'social issues' voters.

That's a pretty good point, actually.

I find it amusing that so many people take for granted that people "should" vote their self-interest. Maybe some people simply have values playing a part in their voting?

[All Along The Watchtower]

I think Democrats give their party too much credit for being "not as bad as the Republicans."

[freepcrusher]

poor people voting republican is nothing new. Its always existed. Rural areas of Ohio, Indiana southwest Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska etc have never been particularly rich but they have always been republican. Its more of an ethnicity thing really. If you're white, you will only vote democrat if you are either

A)gay
B)jewish
C) Scandinavian
D)have a high level of education
E) atheist/nonobservant
F) unmarried

because poor white people are usually neither of these things, they skew disproportionately  republican.

[LastVoter]

poor people voting republican is nothing new. Its always existed. Rural areas of Ohio, Indiana southwest Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska etc have never been particularly rich but they have always been republican. Its more of an ethnicity thing really. If you're white, you will only vote democrat if you are either

A)gay
B)jewish
C) Scandinavian
D)have a high level of education
E) atheist/nonobservant
F) unmarried

because poor white people are usually neither of these things, they skew disproportionately  republican.

You should add union member in there.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

poor people voting republican is nothing new. Its always existed. Rural areas of Ohio, Indiana southwest Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska etc have never been particularly rich but they have always been republican. Its more of an ethnicity thing really. If you're white, you will only vote democrat if you are either

A)gay
B)jewish
C) Scandinavian
D)have a high level of education
E) atheist/nonobservant
F) unmarried

because poor white people are usually neither of these things, they skew disproportionately  republican.

You should add union member in there.

McCain got 40% of Union households

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

My favorite part was when the only person that might have an answer got sh**t on for answering.  Preconceived notions for the win!  You may now go back to your bash thread disguised as a question thread.




(and I'm not saying poor conservatives voting for Republicans make sense)

I find people who don't know any liberals and base their opinions off of wildly inaccurate TV stereotypes amusing. Sue me----after I'm done watching this Broadway musical, that is.

Actually that is a valid point.  Most people live in pretty polarized environments.  Stereotypes are all we have to go on, and our only contacts with liberals are incidents like what is going on in Whiteville now.

I don't recall knowing any liberals growing up, and don't really have contact with any of them in person now.  Hmm.. There is one friend of mine who used to be vice-chair of the local Log Cabin Republicans group but can't stomach voting GOP anymore... does that count?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Here to turn your stereotype on it's head:
I don't see how crass culture like Married With Children or Pro Wrestling are reconcilable with conservative values.

[Wonkish1]

3.) They believe its in their enlightened self-interests to support policies based on percieved systemic consequences and outcomes, and are convinced that the policies they support are in the best interests of the country, and therefore in the best interests for themselves in the long-term.

^^^^^^


Maybe instead it should be shocking that so many people vote for their own short term interest over their long term interests.

Look if every voter in the country thought like the OP the national debt would never be an issue and we'd be approaching our 3rd national bankruptcy.

Some people think long term and focus on things like jobs, career mobility, stability, safety, etc.  then it comes down to which party you think will deliver on these things, performance, etc.


Others vote on "What will you do for me tomorrow". And for that crowd if your poor you want as much benefits as you can get and your Dem, if your rich and republican its the lowest taxes you can get, and if your rich and a Dem than its how many more subsidies, government contracts you can get, or how much of a handout you can get from artificially low interest rates courtesy of the Fed--Why do you think there are so many Dem bankers?

Not everybody thinks about "What can you do for me tomorrow?", some think about "What can you do for me and my family over the next decade and beyond?"

[Wonkish1]

Just because many teenage to 20 something year old Dems on these forums think that whatever the tax rates are has no impact on the broad economy, prevalence of jobs, incomes, etc. doesn't mean that there isn't a large group of people in this country that disagree. And those things matter to yes even many poor people.

[King]

Htmldon alludes to the real reason he subscribes to a conservative economic agenda despite being poor. And it's not the reason he spent the most time explaining. It's his offhand complaint about liberals wanting to take away the cross.

People used to vote for their economic interests in the South and Plains. Then the Democrats dropped social conservatism after Carter.

Poor Republicans convince themselves that economic conservatism must work because if they don't that means the candidates who are Pro-Jesus are wrong.

Trees grow from the roots.

If the Democrats could still find one, they'd be wise to nominate a hardline Christian liberal--who can adequately sell progressive economics to the Bible Belt. As long as the social liberals in Congress can block any laws on that front from hitting his desk, it will be quite the successful eight years.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Just because many teenage to 20 something year old Dems on these forums think that whatever the tax rates are has no impact on the broad economy, prevalence of jobs, incomes, etc. doesn't mean that there isn't a large group of people in this country that disagree. And those things matter to yes even many poor people.

Just because you disagree, doesn't mean you're necesssarily correct.

[phk]

"Poor conservatives" aren't a large group of people.

[TeePee4Prez]

poor people voting republican is nothing new. Its always existed. Rural areas of Ohio, Indiana southwest Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska etc have never been particularly rich but they have always been republican. Its more of an ethnicity thing really. If you're white, you will only vote democrat if you are either

A)gay
B)jewish
C) Scandinavian
D)have a high level of education
E) atheist/nonobservant
F) unmarried

because poor white people are usually neither of these things, they skew disproportionately  republican.

You should add union member in there.

McCain got 40% of Union households

And I'll add some unions even support Republicans depending on contracts, etc.

[LastVoter]

poor people voting republican is nothing new. Its always existed. Rural areas of Ohio, Indiana southwest Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska etc have never been particularly rich but they have always been republican. Its more of an ethnicity thing really. If you're white, you will only vote democrat if you are either

A)gay
B)jewish
C) Scandinavian
D)have a high level of education
E) atheist/nonobservant
F) unmarried

because poor white people are usually neither of these things, they skew disproportionately  republican.

You should add union member in there.

McCain got 40% of Union households

That's less than general population. I'd also make the argument that more Union members are white than average population . So being a poor white in a Union is more likely to vote Democratic.

[memphis]

Htmldon alludes to the real reason he subscribes to a conservative economic agenda despite being poor. And it's not the reason he spent the most time explaining. It's his offhand complaint about liberals wanting to take away the cross.

People used to vote for their economic interests in the South and Plains. Then the Democrats dropped social conservatism after Carter.

Poor Republicans convince themselves that economic conservatism must work because if they don't that means the candidates who are Pro-Jesus are wrong.

Trees grow from the roots.

If the Democrats could still find one, they'd be wise to nominate a hardline Christian liberal--who can adequately sell progressive economics to the Bible Belt. As long as the social liberals in Congress can block any laws on that front from hitting his desk, it will be quite the successful eight years.

Only William Jennings Bryan can save us now...

[Link]

People don't get that they are the welfare queens. All our schools and roads and police etc don't come cheap. We all are beneficiaries. There is a huge state of denial.

It's even worse with corporations and the 1%.  They all assume they made their billions in a vacuum.  The deny using tax payer funded roads to move their cargo.  They deny using tax payer funded ports to import and export their cargo.  They deny using tax payer funded airports.  They deny using tax payer funded courts to defend their business interests.  Nope the taxpayer didn't provide any of these facilities for their businesses.  They did it all by themselves.  It's disgusting.

[All Along The Watchtower]

People don't get that they are the welfare queens. All our schools and roads and police etc don't come cheap. We all are beneficiaries. There is a huge state of denial.

It's even worse with corporations and the 1%.  They all assume they made their billions in a vacuum.  The deny using tax payer funded roads to move their cargo.  They deny using tax payer funded ports to import and export their cargo.  They deny using tax payer funded airports.  They deny using tax payer funded courts to defend their business interests.  Nope the taxpayer didn't provide any of these facilities for their businesses.  They did it all by themselves.  It's disgusting.

And the taxpayer funded government upholds the corporation's "right" as a "person."

[Kevin]

Nobody thinks guns play a part?  No matter how much some Dems try and distance themselves from it, they are the party of gun control.  That reason alone prevents many many people from voting Dem.

I'm sure you guys could turn that into another insult if you try hard enough.

Democrats have that reputation but they've basically done nothing on guns on the national level in a decade. Gun rights have been expanded far more than what they used to be several years ago.

Is it an insult to point out that perceptions being unwarranted is silly?

That's certainly false if you look at how most Democratic politicians vote on gun issues, and over the past 3 or so years Dems in Congress have proposed anti-gun legislation.

I come give a link if I wasn't too lazy to cite it. 

[Yank2133]

A lot of this stems from GOP fear tactics of the past 25-30 years. They have been able to play on poor whites fears of race, homosexuality, change etc. and it has basically given them power.

It also doesn't help the Democrats have a reputation as out of touch and have really done nothing to change that narrative.

[Wonkish1]

Just because many teenage to 20 something year old Dems on these forums think that whatever the tax rates are has no impact on the broad economy, prevalence of jobs, incomes, etc. doesn't mean that there isn't a large group of people in this country that disagree. And those things matter to yes even many poor people.

Just because you disagree, doesn't mean you're necesssarily correct.

First of all, the question was about people doing whats in their own self interest. Many poor republicans don't want taxes to rise because they think it will effect their employment. That is much better answer than accusing of them being stupid or ignorant.

Second, its funny that someone who believes that whether marginal tax rates are 20% or 70%  they have no impact on the broad economy and then act like they represent an equal alternative view.

Just because you disagree, doesn't make you necessarily sane.

[Wonkish1]

A lot of this stems from GOP fear tactics of the past 25-30 years. They have been able to play on poor whites fears of race, homosexuality, change etc. and it has basically given them power.

It also doesn't help the Democrats have a reputation as out of touch and have really done nothing to change that narrative.

Here comes another ignorant shill ^^^^^ to furnish us with his oversimplified thought vomit.

[All Along The Watchtower]

A lot of this stems from GOP fear tactics of the past 25-30 years. They have been able to play on poor whites fears of race, homosexuality, change etc. and it has basically given them power.

It also doesn't help the Democrats have a reputation as out of touch and have really done nothing to change that narrative.

Here comes another ignorant shill ^^^^^ to furnish us with his oversimplified thought vomit.

What part of that was inaccurate?