No one is talking about the Democrats trouble with white, rural voters (Representatives, salaries)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everyone talks about demographics and the GOP. The GOP has a problem with attracting Latinos and blacks, but some are at least trying to change that. The liberal media mocks them, but at least it's an attempt...granted, with people like Trump running, it makes it hard for them sometimes.
But the Democrats have the same problem with rural, white voters. The white working-class as a whole is essentially off limits to Democrats. They have urban whites and a big chunk of the suburban middle-class white vote, but NONE of the blue collar whites, especially in the country.
And they never do or say anything to fix this issue. I mean at least you have people like Rand Paul talking about prison reform and the war on drugs, and people like Bush who talk about how education for blacks is not up to par, but where is there a single Democratic candidate talking to white people in Mississippi about the issues that matter to them?
The fact is if you live in a small town in Montana where hunting is the favorite past-time and the police are half an hour away so it is advisable to have a gun, the Democratic party is not looking good for you. If you are a small town white person who is unsure about gay marriage, the Democrats insisting that every Christian baker should be forced to make a gay wedding cake is not the party you will vote for (and you may ask if they would force a Kosher deli to carry pork or force a Muslim halal bakery to make a gay wedding cake too, but I digress )
I don't see any attempt at outreach to rural areas by Democrats, and don't see them even trying to win white workers. As the young libertarians in the GOP become more of a force, you'll see more outreach to urban and minority voters. But when this, the last generation of rural Democrats die out, what will replace them but Republicans? And why are liberals not addressing this?
Reason being is what they will never admit. The liberals of today hate rural white people (rednecks) a lot more than conservatives of libertarians hate minorities.
They have no problem saying "yeah, Republicans are all country folks" and never stop and consider that maybe their disdain for them is bad in the long run. Do things like this, the way liberals usually talk, really help their cause?
You will see the GOP win Colorado, Nevada, and Michigan before you ever see a Democrat win Alabama, Kentucky or Alaska. And the Democrats don't seem to mind, and that may well be their undoing.
I agree with you Op but the Democrats have written off this demographic for the most part and are using racist policies against whites to attract minority and illegal immigrant votes which may be enough to keep the Presidency. The fight is for Asian and Hispanic voters.
the white rural male vote and the white male vote in general is going to continue to be of less significance as the country continues to become more diverse.
the gop got 70 percent of the southern white vote in 2012 and the election wasn't even close.
that vote will die off as the hispanic/asian/black vote continues to rise.
if i was a politician, the last group id waste time with are white males, especially rural white males.
the hispanic vote and black vote, particularly the hispanic vote is what will determine the election.
plus younger whites are generally more liberal than conservative these days anyways.
the conservative white male roams where nobody is, which means the vote doesn't need to be taken seriously.
nobody cares about some white male out in idaho or montana. they will stay in large numbers there and get the gop there 3 or 2 electoral votes.
the whites in the states that matter are actually leaning democrat.
look at virginia as a prime example.
the conservative rural white male vote should continue to be ignored for the more important hispanic vote. tactics should be in place as well to try to get at least 85-90 percent of the black vote as well and 40-45 percent of the female vote.
you do that and you can win with little of the white vote.
plus who are white males going to go to anyways? the gop heads are embarrassed by the white males who vote for them and the democrats don't need the vote.
the gop got 70 percent of the southern white vote in 2012 and the election wasn't even close.
Close? Nope.
That election was decided by just 4.2% of the people who voted and 2.1% of the US population. A very small demographic swing can hugely change the election. Both parties covet every vote they can get.
.......
The fact is if you live in a small town in Montana where hunting is the favorite past-time and the police are half an hour away so it is advisable to have a gun, the Democratic party is not looking good for you.
......
I don't see any attempt at outreach to rural areas by Democrats, and don't see them even trying to win white workers. As the young libertarians in the GOP become more of a force, you'll see more outreach to urban and minority voters. But when this, the last generation of rural Democrats die out, what will replace them but Republicans? And why are liberals not addressing this?
Reason being is what they will never admit. The liberals of today hate rural white people (rednecks) a lot more than conservatives of libertarians hate minorities.
They have no problem saying "yeah, Republicans are all country folks" and never stop and consider that maybe their disdain for them is bad in the long run. Do things like this, the way liberals usually talk, really help their cause? ........
You will see the GOP win Colorado, Nevada, and Michigan before you ever see a Democrat win Alabama, Kentucky or Alaska. And the Democrats don't seem to mind, and that may well be their undoing.
Yes, all of my white friends in New England hate themselves! LOL!!!
I recently looked at a map that showed how many people in New England own guns. HINT: it is way more than you seem to think (or i thought.) Obviously, they just care about other things too.
I love that map that pretty much shows how much higher education correlates with voting Democratic. It took me a second to realize that "the other blue patch" is the Albuquerque, NM area. They have more people with college degrees vs any other place in the entire country!
I think that map above also shows the "conspiracy fallacy" in thinking that "the poor vote Democratic to get more entitlements." None of those blue places are "poor" but guess what?? THE POOR DON'T VOTE!!
The reality of the situation is that as "rednecks," along with everyone else in the USA, are having less kids. THEY are the ones who will need to be "replaced" when they die off. I would not be surprised if more immigrants are coming each year than how many babies "rednecks are having.
There is little "wrong" with a libertarian view. Contrast it with the "tea party" and the libertarians seem almost holy.
I don't "hate rednecks." (I can dirt bike and enjoy demolition derbies along with the best of them!) I don't "hate" anyone. I'm DISGUSTED by certain types, sure. But no hate.
FWIW, i have NEVER seen the level of "hate" coming from anyone as i have from white people hating blacks and browns- both liberal and conservative white people.
The problem, as I see it, is that there are no truly moderate POTUS candidates who profess to have views that are in keeping with the majority of voters, meaning those who are neither very poor nor very rich.
Most people, according to the polls I have read, support abortion in at least some cases, yet the Republican candidates seem to be trying to outdo each other in saying they are against abortion in most, if not all, cases.
Most people are against illegal immigration, yet the Democrats seem to be condoning it in their efforts to gain more Hispanic votes (with many Republicans now joining in). And although most people are not, or only slightly. racist, some candidates seem to be promoting racism (white, black or Hispanic, depending on the candidate).
Most people are outraged at CEO's who make multi-million salaries while thousands of their workers have been laid off and/or struggle to pay their bills, yet Trump and Fiorina brag about how wealthy they are and make clear that they think that profits are more important than jobs for U.S. residents.
For me and many people, it truly is a struggle to decide which candidate is the least offensive.
Last edited by katharsis; 09-24-2015 at 08:20 AM..
The liberals of today hate rural white people (rednecks) a lot more than conservatives of libertarians hate minorities.
No, I don't think the liberals hate those people, though I must admit that many liberals probably look down at the "rednecks" (in your words) when they utter vile things or do really dumb things. You know what I am talking about. One recent example: Kim Davis.
Here is the truth, in our two party system, the parties are basically diametrically opposed on absolutely everything. Do they agree on anything? Nope. It's because many issues are simply mutually exclusive. For example, how can Democrats take up a cause for any anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-immigration, anti-gun control, and anti-equal rights issues, all of which are of great importance to many of the rural whites, when doing so would be 100% contrary to DNC's 50-year platform?
Reverse is true for Republicans changing their positions on fundamental issues to bring blacks and Hispanics into their tent (e.g., affirmative action, social safety net, civil rights, immigration reform, abortion, etc.) - not gonna happen despite the party's lip service. What have they actually done to get their support?
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
You will see the GOP win Colorado, Nevada, and Michigan before you ever see a Democrat win Alabama, Kentucky or Alaska. And the Democrats don't seem to mind, and that may well be their undoing.
Ummm, Colorado and Nevada are widely recognized as swing states, and AL, KY and AL are solid red states. That's like saying "Dems will win Colorado, Nevada and Ohio before you ever see a Republican win New York, Massachusetts and Illinois."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
