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.
Catholics in general are predisposed towards the Democrat party, as is virtually every other culture in the world. Catholicism is a very authority-centric religion where the laypeople are considered too stupid to be able to have a relationship with God absent a clerical intermediary. And what is more authoritative than government? Consequently, it makes sense to vote for the paternalistic big government party if you're catholic.
The Republicans are at a severe disadvantage because it's basically only protestants from the British isles and maybe Germany and the Netherlands that naturally have the rugged individualist value system. Virtually every other culture around the world is centered on a "big man" providing for people in exchange for loyalty. Or it is based on a very communal view of society where individualism is suppressed. I'm convinced the overwhelming communal and confucian nature of Asian culture is what draws asians to the Democrat party despite their strong work ethic and family values.
Bottomline is that the days of traditional American conservatism are numbered as more foreigners are allowed in. Conservatism will evolve into the more paternalistic European or Latin American model where the government is highly involved with the economy and social issues in order to promote socially conservative values.
One party wants to allow every citizen south of us to come in and the other doesn't. The economics argument doesn't matter if Democrats bring in millions of immigrants that will make your vote ineffective either way. What Latin American country has a history of free markets? None.
If you can't see the difference in the two parties maybe you and other libertarians deserve what is coming.
At rock bottom motivation the two parties are the same.
Right now, anyone who can't see the difference between actual Republicans and the extremists who have hijacked the Grand Old Party and turned her over to a group who think it's just great to grope her privates without permission and turn her into a ***** either isn't paying attention or is aligned with or one of the hijackers.
The Republican Party, the TRUE Republican Party, deserves far better than that and it's about time that the real Republicans stand up and take her back from those extremists.
The Democrats have their own problems, both parties always do, but right this moment in time, from out here in A Pox on Both Your Parties land (the founders had it right when they started this government without parties, period), the "Republican" part is a far greater threat to the Republic itself. Later, it might be the Democrats that are the greater threat, but they don't hold a candle to what's being done to threaten the Constitution and the country.
By the way, by your description above, you have not one clue what the Democratic Party stands for beyond what der fuhrer Trump tells you to think.
The D's want more legal immigrants so they can get votes. But they need them to become citizens for that to work;
The R's want more illegal immigrants so they can have cheap labor/overall labor pool salary depression; however, they have to pander to their voting base, so they pretend they are against immigration.
"You have to spread some reputation around before giving more to Trainwreck20." (Why does that always sound a little dirty?)
You're welcome. My job was pirated to CoCo and we moved from California. I would have liked to stay but it was 2014 and the economy was not the same as it has been since the 2016 election. We voted Republican in California and we voted Republican in the 2018 election in TX.
I should add for HRC's benefit that my wife made her own mind up on how to vote and the only reason I believe she voted a straight ticket is because she was done quickly.
Catholics in general are predisposed towards the Democrat party, as is virtually every other culture in the world. Catholicism is a very authority-centric religion where the laypeople are considered too stupid to be able to have a relationship with God absent a clerical intermediary. And what is more authoritative than government? Consequently, it makes sense to vote for the paternalistic big government party if you're catholic.
The Republicans are at a severe disadvantage because it's basically only protestants from the British isles and maybe Germany and the Netherlands that naturally have the rugged individualist value system. Virtually every other culture around the world is centered on a "big man" providing for people in exchange for loyalty. Or it is based on a very communal view of society where individualism is suppressed. I'm convinced the overwhelming communal and confucian nature of Asian culture is what draws asians to the Democrat party despite their strong work ethic and family values.
Bottomline is that the days of traditional American conservatism are numbered as more foreigners are allowed in. Conservatism will evolve into the more paternalistic European or Latin American model where the government is highly involved with the economy and social issues in order to promote socially conservative values.
IMO, if the Irish or any other Catholic-dominated society leans (D), it would be due more for its policies than any predisposition to authoritarianism.
I also disagree with your opinion that only British Protestants (and maybe German and Dutch) "naturally" have the rugged individualist system. In my opinion, the British, more specifically the English, had a historically rigid, authoritarian culture, centered around the monarchy, military, and class system. Was this not a feature that prompted the nascent Americans to rebel? The US was formed by individuals who were traditionalists in the English manner, opportunists, and rebellious individuals. Every society contains these, but which ones dominate depends on time and place.
Consider that the peak period of westward expansion in the US coincided with the height of Victorian England's colonial powers. Victorian England was anything but individualistic. Rather, it was the embodiment of "the big man" system, and that was what greatly aided in it becoming, and maintaining, its status as a colonial powerhouse across the globe, for such a long period. And authoritarian? Let's just say, one would not want to go against the Queen's (hypocritical) views on morality, which she imposed upon her society, and which defined life for the English during her rule.
The US sprang from English roots, and any rugged individualistic feature in its culture was a result of certain individuals and timing, not a defined culture. Some mountain men and pioneers driving westward expansion were motivated by this individualistic trait, others by greed, and other still, by necessity. I find many aspects of the traditional/colonial, English-influenced, subculture in certain parts of New England today to be very communal. Two common ones spring to mind: Junior League and the Boy/Girl Scouts of America.
As for other non-Western cultures' views on individuality, they are a result of time and place. Internal strife and civil wars suggests traits of individuality as well. Whether the US will evolve into a society you predict is purely speculative, because you assume that future conditions will be the same as those that brought forth the "paternalistic European and Latin American model."
ETA: As for immigration in the US today - legal and illegal - ask yourself who has been, and is currently, in control of the real levers of power in the US controlling this issue.
It's CNN but it's not surprising. As many folks flee California that state has only gotten bluer over time. Not to mention the other "refugees" from up north and other parts of the country escaping leftist policies. Natives probably never experienced how bad these areas have gotten, plus Ted is an unlikable lazy bum.
Transplants might be able to save red Texas after all.
Catholics in general are predisposed towards the Democrat party, as is virtually every other culture in the world. Catholicism is a very authority-centric religion where the laypeople are considered too stupid to be able to have a relationship with God absent a clerical intermediary. And what is more authoritative than government? Consequently, it makes sense to vote for the paternalistic big government party if you're catholic.
Many Catholics fail to live up to what their religion dictates in terms of their voting patterns. If someone is a Catholic as the doctrine of the religion is written, the candidates of the Republican Party are the choices that are more aligned with their tenets of their faith. Catholicism as it is meant to be interpreted is very much against abortion, and the Republican Party is the anti-abortion party. Catholicism does believe in being charitable to the less fortunate, and the Republican ideology believes in helping the less fortunate while positioning themselves with the work ethic to improve their situation. The Democratic Party has done nothing to help poor people, except make them dependent upon government handouts, which perpetuates the cycle of poverty. If a government of the people and by the people really wants to help poor people, it helps limit the government handouts and provides a path forward to remedying the problem of poverty. Free market capitalism advocated by the Republican Party is the path forward out of poverty. Since I truly believe in helping poor people, I prefer a conservative ideology, instead of a liberal dependency ideology.
Right now, the Catholic Church has a terrible leader. Pope Francis is essentially a heretic. He is loved by the liberal media since due to his strong socialistic leaders, but I do not believe that he is a leader of the Catholic Church as the church was meant to be led. Even before Francis, Catholics in general had a problem with interpreting their religion. There had been too much emphasis on the social justice and love parts of the faith, and not enough emphasis on the discipline, perseverance, and justice parts of the faith. This has led Catholics to being more liberal historically. This is a problem that has gotten worse with time.
The ethnic background of Catholics in the United States has changed since the mid-1800s. From the mid 1800s until about 1980-1990 or so, the faith was the faith of European immigrants who were not of Anglo Saxon or Germanic people. This was mainly the Irish, Italian, or Polish immigrants and their descendants. However, over time, the Irish, Italians, and Polish immigrants and their descendants either intermarried with other Europeans or maybe even non-Europeans, or fell away from Catholicism. Since the 1980s, a greater share of Catholics come from Hispanic/Latino origins. The biggest Hispanic/Latino subgroup comes from Mexico, where from 1929 to 2000, all levels of Mexican government were controlled by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). Even today, the PRI is still powerful in Mexico. The PRI is very much like the United States' Democratic Party. During the era of single party PRI rule, the PRI would bribe the poor with handouts for votes, just like the Democratic Party does in the United States. Mexican immigration, legal and illegal, really started to occur during the PRI single party era and I think it has influenced the ideology of a lot of Mexican-American voters. Similar stories can also be told of other Hispanic subgroups. Only older Cubans in Florida are reliable Republican voters among Hispanic/Latino subgroups, and these older Cubans realize that the Democratic Party is reminiscent of Fidel Castro Cuba.
Many Catholics fail to live up to what their religion dictates in terms of their voting patterns. If someone is a Catholic as the doctrine of the religion is written, the candidates of the Republican Party are the choices that are more aligned with their tenets of their faith. Catholicism as it is meant to be interpreted is very much against abortion, and the Republican Party is the anti-abortion party. Catholicism does believe in being charitable to the less fortunate, and the Republican ideology believes in helping the less fortunate while positioning themselves with the work ethic to improve their situation. The Democratic Party has done nothing to help poor people, except make them dependent upon government handouts, which perpetuates the cycle of poverty. If a government of the people and by the people really wants to help poor people, it helps limit the government handouts and provides a path forward to remedying the problem of poverty. Free market capitalism advocated by the Republican Party is the path forward out of poverty. Since I truly believe in helping poor people, I prefer a conservative ideology, instead of a liberal dependency ideology.
Right now, the Catholic Church has a terrible leader. Pope Francis is essentially a heretic. He is loved by the liberal media since due to his strong socialistic leaders, but I do not believe that he is a leader of the Catholic Church as the church was meant to be led. Even before Francis, Catholics in general had a problem with interpreting their religion. There had been too much emphasis on the social justice and love parts of the faith, and not enough emphasis on the discipline, perseverance, and justice parts of the faith. This has led Catholics to being more liberal historically. This is a problem that has gotten worse with time.
The ethnic background of Catholics in the United States has changed since the mid-1800s. From the mid 1800s until about 1980-1990 or so, the faith was the faith of European immigrants who were not of Anglo Saxon or Germanic people. This was mainly the Irish, Italian, or Polish immigrants and their descendants. However, over time, the Irish, Italians, and Polish immigrants and their descendants either intermarried with other Europeans or maybe even non-Europeans, or fell away from Catholicism. Since the 1980s, a greater share of Catholics come from Hispanic/Latino origins. The biggest Hispanic/Latino subgroup comes from Mexico, where from 1929 to 2000, all levels of Mexican government were controlled by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). Even today, the PRI is still powerful in Mexico. The PRI is very much like the United States' Democratic Party. During the era of single party PRI rule, the PRI would bribe the poor with handouts for votes, just like the Democratic Party does in the United States. Mexican immigration, legal and illegal, really started to occur during the PRI single party era and I think it has influenced the ideology of a lot of Mexican-American voters. Similar stories can also be told of other Hispanic subgroups. Only older Cubans in Florida are reliable Republican voters among Hispanic/Latino subgroups, and these older Cubans realize that the Democratic Party is reminiscent of Fidel Castro Cuba.
Do you have a source for saying the Democratic party bribes people in the US?
Name one purely capitalist country that has ever succeeded on Earth?
Free market capitalism advocated by the Republican Party is the path forward out of poverty.
How is this supposed to work in declining areas of the country, such as Ohio or West Virginia?
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.
