U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Iowa
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-22-2017, 07:42 PM
 
387 posts, read 541,782 times
Reputation: 471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgg View Post
To say they're uneducated, confederate flag waiving morons shows complete ignorance as to who these people really are.
But, they gleefully vote for a Confederate flag-waving moron...which means they don't understand a darn thing about their own history. On that basis alone, they're completely uneducated AND ignorant.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2017, 07:52 PM
 
162 posts, read 279,151 times
Reputation: 203
Sioux County is simply a very religious county, and as a result, the vast majority of residents are Republican and vote Republican every election. Another thing worth mentioning is there are two Christian colleges in Sioux County, where much of the population works at or graduated from. The county is very Conservative, but also well educated.


The Republican Party has largely been influenced and supported by Evangelical Christians. One thing worth noting though is that Trump only received 11% of votes in the Iowa Republican Caucus, compared to 24.3% state wide. Sioux Center is where Trump made the famous and controversial remark that he could shoot someone and not lose any votes. While Trump did extremely well in Sioux County in the general election, he did not receive strong support in the party nomination process. I wonder how much his speech in Sioux Center hurt his support there. I'm sure it didn't help, but I think it was mainly other factors like his remarks about women, or his longtime business connection to Casinos.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2017, 05:01 AM
 
387 posts, read 541,782 times
Reputation: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayman29 View Post
I'm sure it didn't help, but I think it was mainly other factors like his remarks about women, or his longtime business connection to Casinos.
...Which brings up an interesting side discussion.

How can you claim to be "great" at business and "terrific" at running things, when you couldn't even get your own casinos' books to balance? Casinos are literally buildings full of machines and tables that take customers' money without giving them anything in return. How do you fail at that?

Trump is the greatest con man I have ever seen. He convinced religious conservatives in Iowa that he was more evangelical than Mike Huckabee. How do you pull off such a feat without being the world's greatest con man?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2017, 06:51 AM
 
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
2,401 posts, read 3,814,830 times
Reputation: 1444
The religious conservatives supported Ted Cruz in Iowa over Huckster ,not Trump .

Also, feel free to link to a photo or article where Trump even mentions the Confed flag....I may have missed that one.

Finally, you don't fly the Confed Flag today becauses it makes some people uncomfortable and thus it is insensitive to that dymanic. But the ignorance lies in not fully understanding the dynamics behind the north-south rift...it was much than slavery.

When we still knew our nation's history, people understood it and that is why no one even raised in eyebrow while we watched the wildly popular Dukes of Hazard back in the 70/80's. with their Confed Flag on the roof of their Dodge Charger. The SJWs won this battle and in the end, didn't help change anything for the better...but they FEEL better now...so there is that.

Last edited by capitalcityguy; 01-25-2017 at 07:03 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2017, 07:55 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,612 posts, read 3,555,960 times
Reputation: 4414
Default Why is Sioux County

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgg View Post
As a person who probably has more connection to this county than anyone that's posted on this thread so far, let me set some things straight.


First, it's a fact that this county will always be the strongest conservative enclave in Iowa, and it's entirely because of their strict religious beliefs. The churches, primarily of the various Reformed varieties, are the main focus of their lives whether it be social, philosophical, or based on family connections. Traditional families and family values exist here like no other area. "Progressive" ideas whether they actually be centered in common sense or more often being in some extreme contrary to past American traditions are shunned here like no where else.


Second, you aren't going to find ANY confederate flags in Sioux County other than by a couple off the wall kooks who you can find existing anywhere across our nation. You'll find more of these along the southern border counties of Iowa than you'll find in Sioux County.


Third, just because you have conservative values, this doesn't mean you're uneducated. To the contrary, the people of Sioux County's schools and general education I will guarantee to you is well above that of most of the state of Iowa. They've had a recent (mostly within the last 10 years) influx of Mexican immigrants into the county to work on the many huge feeding operations in this county. Their children's entrance into the school systems, just because of language deficiencies alone, will lower the public school performances somewhat as of recently. Incidentally, did you know that more hogs are raised in Sioux County than in the entire state of South Dakota? In fact, recently they were listed as 2nd in the NATION by counties in hog production. These are large operations and unless you have been exposed to agriculture, it is a very complicated occupation today. The notion of the "dumb" farmer still held by city folks is a product of pure ignorance. The level of knowledge to be successful I guarantee would shock those from the major metropolitan areas that think that they're sooooo educated and intelligent.


I don't adhere to the attitude of many of these people in Sioux County as they DO look down upon those not of their Dutch heritage (to some degree) and more importantly their religious affiliations where they're right and everyone else is wrong. Frankly, I've had my fill of it over the years as many of my close relatives fit this attitude. To say they're uneducated, confederate flag waiving morons shows complete ignorance as to who these people really are.


Jmgg
This is unrelated to the topic at hand but you are South Dakotan who inputs here so I'll ask you about a current issue up in your state.
I checked and the South Dakota forum does not have an active thread going about your legislature & how it is in process to repeal a 2016 voter-approved ethics law.
Is that geting coverage up there & is there a sense of outrage among South Dakotans?
We saw the GOP do something else like this right out of the gate after the November elections when their membership in Congress voted to gut ethics law on a national basis.
The blow-back was fierce and they had to backtrack. So, citizen input & energy can be effective at getting results.
I don't care if this would be done by Democrats or Republicans. If it were occurring in my state, I'd be having a fit!
Maybe it's time for a new thread on your forum?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2017, 06:50 PM
 
Location: Sioux Falls, SD area
3,616 posts, read 5,014,683 times
Reputation: 6364
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
Jmgg
This is unrelated to the topic at hand but you are South Dakotan who inputs here so I'll ask you about a current issue up in your state.
I checked and the South Dakota forum does not have an active thread going about your legislature & how it is in process to repeal a 2016 voter-approved ethics law.
Is that geting coverage up there & is there a sense of outrage among South Dakotans?
We saw the GOP do something else like this right out of the gate after the November elections when their membership in Congress voted to gut ethics law on a national basis.
The blow-back was fierce and they had to backtrack. So, citizen input & energy can be effective at getting results.
I don't care if this would be done by Democrats or Republicans. If it were occurring in my state, I'd be having a fit!
Maybe it's time for a new thread on your forum?

I'll answer this on this forum since you asked. The intricacies of this Initiated Measure #22 I can't recite off the top of my head, but a part of it was ethics reform.


We've had some problems over the last few years with some government programs such as EB-5, the Gear Up program, and the enormous mess at a place called Mid Central Cooperative where the director quite frankly stole hundreds of thousands of tax dollars (with help from some other people with government connections) then ended up committing suicide (which is the official story) after killing his entire family.


Frankly, all of these programs should have been closely scrutinized by someone in our state government, but no one did and massive abuse followed.


The above is why Initiated Measure 22 was created and voted on and ended up passing with 52% of the vote. The part that the people liked about it was that it created a non-partisan ethics committee as well as having a clause where state legislators could not accept gifts from anyone. The problem is there was some other things in it that our states attorney has stated are not constitutional. Our governor and our legislators are in the process of completely scrapping the whole thing, even though the people voted for it.


I'm a conservative and did not vote for it because it had other things attached to it that at the time I thought ruined it PLUS it was heavily advertised and financed by outside interests mostly from the east coast. I am all for the ethics committee and close monitoring of anything that can be construed as a gift to possibly entice future favors. (An example being some husband getting paid ridiculous un-heard of sums of money for 45 minute speeches by foreign governments while the government employee wife holds one of the most powerful positions in the country) .


I am, however like you stated, upset that our state leaders aren't fine tuning out the parts that may be unconstitutional and keeping the meat and potatoes of it. After all, the people of South Dakota voted for it. What gives our state leaders the right to totally ignore something that was passed by the people.


Our state motto is "Under God, the People Rule". Well apparently that must not be the case.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2017, 06:47 AM
 
Location: Jonesboro
3,612 posts, read 3,555,960 times
Reputation: 4414
Default Why is Sioux County...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgg View Post
I'll answer this on this forum since you asked. The intricacies of this Initiated Measure #22 I can't recite off the top of my head, but a part of it was ethics reform.


We've had some problems over the last few years with some government programs such as EB-5, the Gear Up program, and the enormous mess at a place called Mid Central Cooperative where the director quite frankly stole hundreds of thousands of tax dollars (with help from some other people with government connections) then ended up committing suicide (which is the official story) after killing his entire family.


Frankly, all of these programs should have been closely scrutinized by someone in our state government, but no one did and massive abuse followed.


The above is why Initiated Measure 22 was created and voted on and ended up passing with 52% of the vote. The part that the people liked about it was that it created a non-partisan ethics committee as well as having a clause where state legislators could not accept gifts from anyone. The problem is there was some other things in it that our states attorney has stated are not constitutional. Our governor and our legislators are in the process of completely scrapping the whole thing, even though the people voted for it.


I'm a conservative and did not vote for it because it had other things attached to it that at the time I thought ruined it PLUS it was heavily advertised and financed by outside interests mostly from the east coast. I am all for the ethics committee and close monitoring of anything that can be construed as a gift to possibly entice future favors. (An example being some husband getting paid ridiculous un-heard of sums of money for 45 minute speeches by foreign governments while the government employee wife holds one of the most powerful positions in the country) .


I am, however like you stated, upset that our state leaders aren't fine tuning out the parts that may be unconstitutional and keeping the meat and potatoes of it. After all, the people of South Dakota voted for it. What gives our state leaders the right to totally ignore something that was passed by the people.


Our state motto is "Under God, the People Rule". Well apparently that must not be the case.
Thanks for that detailed explanation there. I appreciate the time you spent.
Like you, I am of the mindset that scrapping something altogether like this is worse than trying to do a smaller reworking or tinkering of what the law says.
Too often there can be an arrogance by legislators to overturn something when it pertains at all to ethics legislation. It has happened repeatedly in my state of Georgia but that's a pitfall of having one party rule to the point where that party has nearly super majority status in the state legislature.
I'm certainly much more moderate to liberal on issues than you are but I'll point out something I have mentioned on the Iowa forum before in an education-related thread as to how a combination of both conservative & liberal elements in the Georgia electorate pushed back & soundly defeated a top down education power grab in November of 2016 thrust forward by the conservative governor & legislature. Bipartisan response like that can happened when citizens get worked up over an out right power grab.
It will be interesting to see how the increased power of the Republican party in Iowa's legislature decides to wield it's influence going forward without the former check on it's power that the Democrats provided in the Senate chamber at the state capitol. We'll see but the noises I'm hearing on proposed legislative initiatives don't have me optimistic & rather disappointed in Iowa to this point.
As for your state motto, ours in Georgia is "Wisdom, justice & modertion" which when you look at the overall history of Georgia, is almost a laughable joke.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2017, 09:19 PM
 
162 posts, read 279,151 times
Reputation: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayman29 View Post
One thing worth noting though is that Trump only received 11% of votes in the Iowa Republican Caucus, compared to 24.3% state wide..
To clarify my statement, Trump only received 11% of the votes in Sioux County in the 2016 Iowa Republican Caucus, a much smaller percent compared to statewide, nearly 25% of the votes in the Republican Caucus. In the general election, Trump won Sioux County by a landslide, but as you can see from the Caucus results, Trump was not Sioux County's favorite candidate. This is exactly why Trump won. Many Republicans may have preferred another candidate, but they had much more common ground with Trump than they did Hillary, so they voted for Trump despite not being completely on board with everything about him.

In the same vein, I don't think Sioux County necessarily supports everything King says or does. He wins Sioux County repeatably because he is the candidate that is the closest represents their political and moral views, but that doesn't mean everyone is satisfied with all of his actions or comments. They may wish another Republican would be their representative in the house, but they haven't had that choice.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2017, 08:34 PM
 
387 posts, read 541,782 times
Reputation: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by capitalcityguy View Post
When we still knew our nation's history, people understood it and that is why no one even raised in eyebrow while we watched the wildly popular Dukes of Hazard back in the 70/80's.
If you knew the nation's history, and more specifically, the history of the Confederate Battle Flag, you wouldn't be so dismissive of what its intended message is by those who fly it today. That is the correct name for the flag, BTW. The actual Confederate Flag did not resemble the emblem found in the "wildly popular" Dukes of Hazard TV show.

After the conclusion of the Civil War, the Confederate Battle Flag practically disappeared from widespread public view. From 1865 to the mid 1900s, the Confederate Battle Flag was nothing more than a symbol of the South's failed attempt to fracture the United States of America. Then, along came the Civil Rights movement which began shortly after World War II. That movement sparked reverence for the flag by those who opposed civil rights. What a coincidence.

National Geographic has a great article on why the Confederate Battle Flag suddenly made a comeback in the South after nearly a century of exile: Why the Confederate Flag Made a 20th Century Comeback

Relying on a 1970s/80s TV action show as proof that the Confederate Battle Flag is not a divisive symbol of the South's defiance in granting civil rights to all, shows just how little you know about American history.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2017, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
2,401 posts, read 3,814,830 times
Reputation: 1444
In my world, people are still allowed to have a difference of opinion. Lest we leave room to be tolerant and except that not all issues are so easy to define.

I am a black South Carolinian. Here’s why I support the Confederate flag.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...=.da69289b07ce
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Iowa
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top