Rural Hispanics vs. Urban Hispanics

[barfbag]

There are many libertarians in the Republicans however, and many, such as Ron Paul and Justin Amash, clash with the religious right on the gay marriage issue. so, I don't really see how your original point holds, that Republicans have a united policy while democrats have a fractured policy.

Back to the main topic, I think Hispanics in rural areas are more conservative for the obvious reasons: they are probably more tradition-oriented that hispanics in cities and suburbs, and thus religious beliefs may matter more to them. Also, the turnout issue.

Very true and I agree. It's normally whites who come to mind when thinking of rural living but other races are no different. People who live in rural areas tend to be more religious and family oriented. Our party does have many Libertarian leaners, but both parties do. If there are more in the GOP, it maybe the fact that economic issues tend to take precedent over social issues unless the economy is superb and Libertarians are more like Republicans on economics.

Indeed.  Also, many people have experienced their land being owned by the federal government in some of these Western states.  They've seen these loony environmentalist nutty laws like the spotted owl stopping timber production in Oregon when its decline had nothing to do with logging and was actually related to its larger cousin predator.

What are you talking about?

Many Western states have the majority of their land owned by the federal government, which enacts restrictive laws that hurt timber, ranching, and other industries.  I was specifically referencing the incident in Oregon with the Spotted Owl. 

This article describes the incidence.  It basically shows how much radical leftist environmentalist policies hurt people in these areas.  It's despicable. 

I would just like to say I'm a birdwatcher right now, and I have studied birds for a while. The Spotted Owl's larger cousin, the Barred Owl (Strix varia) lives primarily in transitional woodland, which is basically forest with some of the trees taken out; so it is more than likely that the barred owl intrusion into spotted owl territory (which require extensive tracts of old-growth forest) can be directly tied to the logging industry removing trees, creating prime barred owl habitat.

In addition, I could bring up the case of powder river basin natural gas, where ranchers are essentially forced of their land due to oil companies having subsurface rights. I would provide a link but I don't have the post count yet.

I concede there may be a few nutty environmentalists but the majority that I have spoken to are realists.

A big help for our environment would be ending the partnerships oil companies have with our federal government. They're allowed to force people off of their land? I know the government does this with their infrastructure projects.

[cheesepizza]

There are many libertarians in the Republicans however, and many, such as Ron Paul and Justin Amash, clash with the religious right on the gay marriage issue. so, I don't really see how your original point holds, that Republicans have a united policy while democrats have a fractured policy.

Back to the main topic, I think Hispanics in rural areas are more conservative for the obvious reasons: they are probably more tradition-oriented that hispanics in cities and suburbs, and thus religious beliefs may matter more to them. Also, the turnout issue.

Very true and I agree. It's normally whites who come to mind when thinking of rural living but other races are no different. People who live in rural areas tend to be more religious and family oriented. Our party does have many Libertarian leaners, but both parties do. If there are more in the GOP, it maybe the fact that economic issues tend to take precedent over social issues unless the economy is superb and Libertarians are more like Republicans on economics.

Indeed.  Also, many people have experienced their land being owned by the federal government in some of these Western states.  They've seen these loony environmentalist nutty laws like the spotted owl stopping timber production in Oregon when its decline had nothing to do with logging and was actually related to its larger cousin predator.

What are you talking about?

Many Western states have the majority of their land owned by the federal government, which enacts restrictive laws that hurt timber, ranching, and other industries.  I was specifically referencing the incident in Oregon with the Spotted Owl. 

This article describes the incidence.  It basically shows how much radical leftist environmentalist policies hurt people in these areas.  It's despicable. 

I would just like to say I'm a birdwatcher right now, and I have studied birds for a while. The Spotted Owl's larger cousin, the Barred Owl (Strix varia) lives primarily in transitional woodland, which is basically forest with some of the trees taken out; so it is more than likely that the barred owl intrusion into spotted owl territory (which require extensive tracts of old-growth forest) can be directly tied to the logging industry removing trees, creating prime barred owl habitat.

In addition, I could bring up the case of powder river basin natural gas, where ranchers are essentially forced of their land due to oil companies having subsurface rights. I would provide a link but I don't have the post count yet.

I concede there may be a few nutty environmentalists but the majority that I have spoken to are realists.

A big help for our environment would be ending the partnerships oil companies have with our federal government. They're allowed to force people off of their land? I know the government does this with their infrastructure projects.

This is why I'd favor giving most of this federally-owned land back to the states.  Let them decide where they want to conserve, where they are good with oil drilling, and what eminent domain restrictions there should be.  Any government closer to the people would be more receptive to their wishes in these instances.

[barfbag]

True for a lot of things, but there are places which should be federally reserved land. ^^^

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

A disproportionate number of rural Latinos are not citizens, and a disproportionate number of those who are citizens either aren't registered to vote or don't bother to vote.

[Flake]

A disproportionate number of rural Latinos are not citizens, and a disproportionate number of those who are citizens either aren't registered to vote or don't bother to vote.

Latinos in rural areas are at higher percentages, illegal immigrants. Almost all of the people voting are white voters in rural areas.