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.
The base of the GOP are comprised of the following (in no particular order):
1: 45-65 year old upper-middle, and upper class white males - Usually voracious FoxNews watchers
2. White religious people. Mostly White Protestants and a fair amount of White Catholics
3. Rednecks - Guns, Bibles, and 'Murica - Their bosses are usually in Group #1. Typically not intelligent enough for critical thinking skills - repeat what they hear from people in Group #1. Because... 'Murica!!! The good news is, they're not all white, they do have red necks. Or is that just a metaphor?
So, let's see... We've got white folks, white folks, and white folks... That's quite the diverse voting group we have there. What's missing from the equation? A huge chunk of women because of the whole "We Republicans control women's bodies..." thing. The exceptions to this rule are white religious women in group #2.
Pretty much all of the minorities to include Latinos, African-Americans, Asians, LGBT's, the exponentially growing group of "Nones" (those with no religious affiliation and/or Atheists), the 18-25 age group, and a fair number of senior citizens... Agreeably, some of these groups can overlap.
But, hey, you've got the overwhelming majority of the very pluralistic, diverse, culturally rich white group. Congratulations.
Note: You don't get to find a single black guy who votes Republican and say "See! We've got blacks too!"
I don't know what to make of this post...serious or satire? It can actually be taken both ways and I am not touching it as I will get suspended again.
This is as good a quote on the topic as I've ever read.
“Everyone knows history is written by the winners, but that cliche misses a crucial detail: Over time, the winners are always the progressives. Conservatism can only win in the short term, because society cannot stop evolving (and social evolution inevitably dovetails with the agenda of those who see change as an abstract positive). It might take seventy years, but it always happens eventually. Serious historians are, almost without exception, self-styled progressives."
― Chuck Klosterman, I Wear the Black Hat: Grappling With Villains
The base of the GOP are comprised of the following (in no particular order):
1: 45-65 year old upper-middle, and upper class white males - Usually voracious FoxNews watchers
2. White religious people. Mostly White Protestants and a fair amount of White Catholics
3. Rednecks - Guns, Bibles, and 'Murica - Their bosses are usually in Group #1. Typically not intelligent enough for critical thinking skills - repeat what they hear from people in Group #1. Because... 'Murica!!! The good news is, they're not all white, they do have red necks. Or is that just a metaphor?
So, let's see... We've got white folks, white folks, and white folks... That's quite the diverse voting group we have there. What's missing from the equation? A huge chunk of women because of the whole "We Republicans control women's bodies..." thing. The exceptions to this rule are white religious women in group #2.
Pretty much all of the minorities to include Latinos, African-Americans, Asians, LGBT's, the exponentially growing group of "Nones" (those with no religious affiliation and/or Atheists), the 18-25 age group, and a fair number of senior citizens... Agreeably, some of these groups can overlap.
But, hey, you've got the overwhelming majority of the very pluralistic, diverse, culturally rich white group. Congratulations.
Note: You don't get to find a single black guy who votes Republican and say "See! We've got blacks too!"
The base of the GOP are comprised of the following (in no particular order):
1: 45-65 year old upper-middle, and upper class white males - Usually voracious FoxNews watchers
2. White religious people. Mostly White Protestants and a fair amount of White Catholics
3. Rednecks - Guns, Bibles, and 'Murica - Their bosses are usually in Group #1. Typically not intelligent enough for critical thinking skills - repeat what they hear from people in Group #1. Because... 'Murica!!! The good news is, they're not all white, they do have red necks. Or is that just a metaphor?
So, let's see... We've got white folks, white folks, and white folks... That's quite the diverse voting group we have there. What's missing from the equation? A huge chunk of women because of the whole "We Republicans control women's bodies..." thing. The exceptions to this rule are white religious women in group #2.
Pretty much all of the minorities to include Latinos, African-Americans, Asians, LGBT's, the exponentially growing group of "Nones" (those with no religious affiliation and/or Atheists), the 18-25 age group, and a fair number of senior citizens... Agreeably, some of these groups can overlap.
But, hey, you've got the overwhelming majority of the very pluralistic, diverse, culturally rich white group. Congratulations.
Note: You don't get to find a single black guy who votes Republican and say "See! We've got blacks too!"
And blacks, Hispanics typically vote Democrat so just what is your point? Each group has a different set of ideals but that doesn't mean that racism is involved.
This is as good a quote on the topic as I've ever read.
“Everyone knows history is written by the winners, but that cliche misses a crucial detail: Over time, the winners are always the progressives. Conservatism can only win in the short term, because society cannot stop evolving (and social evolution inevitably dovetails with the agenda of those who see change as an abstract positive). It might take seventy years, but it always happens eventually. Serious historians are, almost without exception, self-styled progressives."
― Chuck Klosterman, I Wear the Black Hat: Grappling With Villains
Well, thats good and all but the majority of people are not either Liberal or Conservative. Would you really want your Engineers to to be Liberal. Artist can be Liberal or Teachers, but when it comes to making products that is not a desireable quality. When you construct bridges, air planes and cars you certainly want Engineers who have conservative principals. One of the reason why only 14% of Engineers identify as Dems. We rely on things that are proven, not experimental.
Well, thats good and all but the majority of people are not either Liberal or Conservative. Would you really want your Engineers to to be Liberal. Artist can be Liberal or Teachers, but when it comes to making products that is not a desireable quality. When you construct bridges, air planes and cars you certainly want Engineers who have conservative principals. One of the reason why only 15% of Engineers identify as Liberal. We rely on things that are proven, not experimental.
It's echoing some of the sentiments on the other thread, but engineers are largely upper income white men, so that probably results in a more fiscally conservative lot. As far as social conservatism goes, I know a LOT of engineers, and I don't know a single one that leans that way. In fact, most are very socially liberal, and I suspect that has much to do with the fact that most are un-religious if not atheist.
You yourself say "we rely on things that are proven, not experimental." That line of thinking doesn't lend itself to the social conservatism that is often a result of religious beliefs, which can't be proven at all.
It's echoing some of the sentiments on the other thread, but engineers are largely upper income white men, so that probably results in a more fiscally conservative lot. As far as social conservatism goes, I know a LOT of engineers, and I don't know a single one that leans that way. In fact, most are very socially liberal, and I suspect that has much to do with the fact that most are un-religious if not atheist.
You yourself say "we rely on things that are proven, not experimental." That line of thinking doesn't lend itself to the social conservatism that is often a result of religious beliefs, which can't be proven at all.
"but engineers are largely upper income white men"
Been in this field for 20 years and if there was a dispoportional # as far as ethnic groups go it would be middle Eastern and perhaps Indian. I work with a cross section of the world as far as racial and ethnic groups go.
"You yourself say "we rely on things that are proven, not experimental.That line of thinking doesn't lend itself to the social conservatism that is often a result of religious beliefs, which can't be proven at all"
Won't argue with that, read though the other thread. Me and most of the Engineers I work with are not religously conservative for those exact reasons. You will hear again and again that many of us despise the Left and don't trust the Right.
Anyway, we are just a small part of the whole and I was just adding my two cents.
The base of the GOP are comprised of the following (in no particular order):
1: 45-65 year old upper-middle, and upper class white males - Usually voracious FoxNews watchers
2. White religious people. Mostly White Protestants and a fair amount of White Catholics
3. Rednecks - Guns, Bibles, and 'Murica - Their bosses are usually in Group #1. Typically not intelligent enough for critical thinking skills - repeat what they hear from people in Group #1. Because... 'Murica!!! The good news is, they're not all white, they do have red necks. Or is that just a metaphor?
So, let's see... We've got white folks, white folks, and white folks... That's quite the diverse voting group we have there. What's missing from the equation? A huge chunk of women because of the whole "We Republicans control women's bodies..." thing. The exceptions to this rule are white religious women in group #2.
Pretty much all of the minorities to include Latinos, African-Americans, Asians, LGBT's, the exponentially growing group of "Nones" (those with no religious affiliation and/or Atheists), the 18-25 age group, and a fair number of senior citizens... Agreeably, some of these groups can overlap.
But, hey, you've got the overwhelming majority of the very pluralistic, diverse, culturally rich white group. Congratulations.
Note: You don't get to find a single black guy who votes Republican and say "See! We've got blacks too!"
Conservative supporters usually find consistencies across conservative agendas. Liberal supporters sometimes identify with one or two issues and don't really care about other liberal agendas, as long as that deal breaker with the republicans exists. Many choose the democrats for the lack of a better choice. I think conservatives, on the other hand, actively chose the republicans.
The republican base isn't diverse today. But it can become diverse without becoming democrats. Fiscal conservatism exists everywhere. You say that engineers are mostly socially liberal because they are well educated. But that does not prevent them from supporting conservatives because of their financial interest. If the conservatives become less socially conservative, then more people would be able to accept them.
This is as good a quote on the topic as I've ever read.
“Everyone knows history is written by the winners, but that cliche misses a crucial detail: Over time, the winners are always the progressives. Conservatism can only win in the short term, because society cannot stop evolving (and social evolution inevitably dovetails with the agenda of those who see change as an abstract positive). It might take seventy years, but it always happens eventually. Serious historians are, almost without exception, self-styled progressives."
― Chuck Klosterman, I Wear the Black Hat: Grappling With Villains
I don't know about that. That seems more like rhetoric.
Human nature never changes. Human society doesn't linearly progress. Europe and China, both old civilizations, had much zigzags in their history. A bright period would be followed by a dark period, and so on and so forth. Overtime, it may progress, but with zigzags and future uncertainties. We are just living in yet another zigzag.
And when it comes to the utterly short lifetimes of ordinary people, the map looks very different. We are a selfish species. Be a winner, not a loser. If you have tried and you lose, alright. Bit at least don't be a sucker.
When you lay on your death bed, what do you ask? You ask if you have lived a life, if it was a good life. You can educate people, indoctrinate them with socialist ideas, but you won't change human nature. It was communism where the worst of humans was brought out. It was there where the working class fought one another bloodily. People sought all means to defend their financial interests and protect their family wealth.
Communism fell. Democracy, the other utopia, stands today without scrutiny.
'Bout the most inaccurate post I have seen in a while...... Makes me wonder if the whole thing is intended as tongue in cheek.
Liberals: Majority white...lower birth rate....few people of color...And boomers are liberal...HUH?!
I never said boomers are liberal. I said boomers are important component of it.
My point is that ethnic diversity will eventually fade out today's liberalism. It may redefine liberalism or just become something entirely different.
You can talk all about social issues, but in the end financial interests are definitive. I am not a democrat nor a republican. I'm social liberal. If people want to marry their flowers, feel free. I'm also an atheist, below zero religious.
But I'm not a strong supporter of state intervention.
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.
Makes me wonder if the whole thing is intended as tongue in cheek.
