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.
Rural America has always been overwhelmingly conservative, especially on social issues. Nothing new here. There were occasional waves of economic populism back during the late 1800s, but other than that, rural areas have always been very conservative.
It might be more accurate to say blue collar or working class rather than strictly rural but the reason behind it, at least for this election, can be summed up rather simply. The democrats spent much more effort on creating what they thought to be an unbeatable demographic voting block, and demonizing anyone that wasn't a part of it, than they did on actually helping and representing the people who were in it. Their whole platform was "they hate blacks, vote for us", "they hate Hispanics, vote for us", "they hate gays/women/genderfluids/otherkins/etc, vote for us". But when anybody stood up to say "that's all well and good but what are you going to do about this problem or that problem?" the only response they got was "you must be one of them!" followed by a string of insults, savage mockery and accusations.
If you create an "unbeatable" voting block and then proceed to ignore their wants and needs, or even worse try to vilify them for expressing them, they will not remain unbeatable for long.
They don't like the government telling them what to do or telling them how to live their lives. They think [the government is] coddling people, like when people's feelings are hurt at the colleges and they send somebody in to make them feel better. Stuff like that drives [voters here] crazy.
I heard a lot about the Affordable Care Act, too. About how people in the individual market were getting clobbered with all these increases, which is a legitimate issue. You know what the economics are like in Red Lake County. There's no way a family can pay $15,000, $20,000 a year for health insurance and make it work. You just can't do it. It's got to change.
... Pushing gun control drives people [in my district] crazy, gay marriage, abortion, deficit spending, you name it. All of that stuff adds up to be a problem for Democrats.
... Well, the sugar guys have been dealing with NAFTA ever since it passed. Now we've got Mexico dumping sugar that's subsidized by the Mexican government into our market in violation of the World Trade Organization, because NAFTA gave them open access to our sugar market. They claim they're not subsidized, but the government owns half the industry in Mexico.
NAFTA's been a big problem for sugar. And when it [NAFTA] was sold, we were supposed to get two or three times more exports to Canada or Mexico than they exported to us. It's been the exact opposite.
... We have become a party of assembling all these different groups, the women's caucus and the black caucus and the Hispanic caucus and the lesbian-gay-transgender caucus and so forth, and that doesn't relate to people out in rural America. The party's become an urban party, and they don't get rural America. They don't get agriculture.
There's more at the link. This is my kind of Democrat. We need more of them.
Don't believe the hype, the ballots boxes were hacked.
It might be more accurate to say blue collar or working class rather than strictly rural but the reason behind it, at least for this election, can be summed up rather simply. The democrats spent much more effort on creating what they thought to be an unbeatable demographic voting block, and demonizing anyone that wasn't a part of it, than they did on actually helping and representing the people who were in it. Their whole platform was "they hate blacks, vote for us", "they hate Hispanics, vote for us", "they hate gays/women/genderfluids/otherkins/etc, vote for us". But when anybody stood up to say "that's all well and good but what are you going to do about this problem or that problem?" the only response they got was "you must be one of them!" followed by a string of insults, savage mockery and accusations.
If you create an "unbeatable" voting block and then proceed to ignore their wants and needs, or even worse try to vilify them for expressing them, they will not remain unbeatable for long.
I think there's an element of truth to your post, yes.
I really wish the Dems would focus more on economic issues and less on "identity politics."
It might be more accurate to say blue collar or working class rather than strictly rural but the reason behind it, at least for this election, can be summed up rather simply. The democrats spent much more effort on creating what they thought to be an unbeatable demographic voting block, and demonizing anyone that wasn't a part of it, than they did on actually helping and representing the people who were in it. Their whole platform was "they hate blacks, vote for us", "they hate Hispanics, vote for us", "they hate gays/women/genderfluids/otherkins/etc, vote for us". But when anybody stood up to say "that's all well and good but what are you going to do about this problem or that problem?" the only response they got was "you must be one of them!" followed by a string of insults, savage mockery and accusations.
If you create an "unbeatable" voting block and then proceed to ignore their wants and needs, or even worse try to vilify them for expressing them, they will not remain unbeatable for long.
Excellent post Uncle Bully. Your posts sums it up, it's going to take them awhile to figure it out though because as they always do, they'll ignore anyone who tries telling them and continue to calling people names, demonizing people and blaming everyone else.
Well, the trend of rural areas voting overwhelmingly red has been well established for decades. The last dying vestiges of rural support for the Democrats was in the South and that died when they flipped the script and supported the Civil Rights Movement. The Dems saw a brief resurgence when Jimmy Carter was elected, but that was the last of it. Evey election since then has been much the same. Cities light up blue. Rural areas light up red:
In 2016 Senate R's were defending 24 of the 34 seats, many in states that Obama won twice. It will be the reverse in 2018. Democrats are defending 10 seats in states that Trump won (sometimes by double-digit margins). Midterms show serious head winds for Democrats.
Democratic Sens are running for reelection in states that voted for Trump over Clinton by 19 points or more. (In West Virginia, Trump won by 42 points.)
It's possible the GOP's 52-seat majority becomes a 60-seat supermajority. At the very least, it looks likely Republicans will pick up a few seats. Some political analysts think that if Republicans turn seats in red or red-leaning states, such as West Virginia, Indiana and Missouri, those seats could stay Republican for a long time. Especially if 2016's presidential election is any indication.
Democrats are so invested in political correctness, who can use what bathroom, climate change instead of jobs. They better face reality and stop identity politics or they could be on the verge of irrelevancy unless you live in a minority district that they win without opposition.
Are you claiming that the GOP was against all these free trade deals?
These anti-worker trade deals were pushed by Wall Street Democrats and Wall Street/Chamber of Commerce Republicans against the will of progressive democrats. Thats just a fact.
Regarding gays, guns and abortion ban. Rural America must also consider whether these issues are so important that they are willing to live in extreme poverty and die a slow death with no health care or paid vacation. Because we must be clear, the war on rural America and working class folks will start and first up is draconian cuts in Medicaid (which of course includes nursing homes) to fund tax breaks for coastal billionaire elites.
Bipartisan, but Clinton sealed it and pushed for it. Most Democrats voted for it - thanks to Clinton.
If you were being less partisan you would be agreeing with me.
Nafta was negotiated by H. He signed it Dec of 92. then it went to the legislative branches of the governments. It was voted yea by 132 Rs and 102 Ds and nays 200. Clinton signed it into law Dec 93. He had been POTUS since January. Not much time to negotiate a treaty.
The rural areas are just about giving up control of Texas to the suburbs. I suspect they are feeling it in other places, too. Small towns started dying in my field of view 50 years ago.
Perhaps if the rural areas control we can do away with all the subsidies they get. City dwellers have been paying for their phone and electric lines for years. When the government decreed we should all have access to the internet, guess whose taxes paid for the rural areas to get that, too.
They can kiss my ass.
Let's all get personally responsible and self supporting.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,968 posts, read 25,588,970 times
Reputation: 12193
I have lived in a variety of settings: suburban, small town, very rural, and 1900 Victorian urban neighborhood. In the country you are far from any govt services like fire and police. You survive by depending on help from your family and neighbors. The core GOP message is less govt, the core Democrat message is more govt.
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.
