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.
I actually saw several "Teamsters for Trump" bumper stickers during the campaign. How many of those old union guys would be turning over in their graves over that? It shocked me, that's for sure. For anyone who grew up in NW Ohio/SE Michigan, AKA auto country, unions don't do Republican. Period.
Well...unions have taken a big beating. The UAW lost a lot to save the industry, as the theory goes. This, under a democratic president. I think membership is kind of desperate and any sweet talker that comes around promising things and giving hope (even though its usually false hope) might get lucky with a few disgruntled union supporters.
Ok...I get what you are saying and you are correct that they add up to way more people than that. I guess my point, after all this confusion, was that conservative is not synonymous with voting republican and liberal is not synonymous to voting democrat (although the latter is less true than the former in Michigan). Hence, its my belief that among likely voters, Michigan is traditionally a red state based upon tending to be more conservative than liberal on the balance of issues, with the majority voting Democrat from time to time because of labor interest which usurp ones political ideology (if it happens to be conservatism). I mean, this is traditionally a union state.....and unions go blue......but a lot of those people, especially in the suburbs, are conservatives really.
What is true of a part is not thus necessarily true for the whole. A team having a great player does not make for a great team. A great team does not mean that an individual player on the team is great. Ergo, a person who votes based upon one or two issues they agree with, which happen to be positions supported by democrats, does not make them liberals (in ideology), if the vast majority of the overall positions they support are championed by Republicans.
Its hard for me to see the state of Michigan as "progressive" with the level of polarization and inequality, some of the worst in the nation, that exists. It's not one big happy family (not that liberalism would create such). I mean, attitudes in Michigan are closer to that of Mississippi.....than Minnesota, but Mississippi is not and was not ever a heavily unionized state, so it always votes red.
I can see what your getting at but I have no idea what Minnesota is like so it's hard for me to compare with Mississippi. I thought Minnesota was no different than Wisconsin but I never paid much attention to either state. But I know Michigan isn't like the deep south (except maybe Georgia somewhat), although there are alot of people from the south that live in Michigan.
I never witnessed much inequality in Michigan and I have lived on both sides of the state but I admit I am young. There are a ton of middle class blacks in Michigan that don't even have a college degree. I (as a black man) haven't had any harder of a time getting good paying jobs as a white man in Michigan. Neither has any of my family members or friends who work hard enough. Same story goes for females, I've seen plenty of successful females as well. There is also alot of black owned businesses in Michigan, especially in Detroit.
Most people I talk to in MI smoke weed so they are all for legalizing it, most don't care about gay couples, there is a huge Muslim population here (you see people wearing hijabs everyday), most don't mind immigrants (we do have the largest middle eastern immigrant population in the world), ect. On the flip side most people in MI believe in guns, don't care about organic food, don't like the idea of these new transgender bathrooms, ect.
Michigan is not a deep blue state but it for sure isn't a deep red state either. It's more moderate if anything (although this could all depend on what part of the state you live in of course). Racism and segregation still exist yes but it also exist in places like Los Angeles (as diverse and progressive as Cali is). Most see Chicago as (fairly) progressive and it's the most segregated city in the country. But hey this is only my personal experience, I admit I never been up north but I imagine most rural areas are conservative no matter what state your in. I personally don't believe it has anything to do with unions at all, most democrats I know aren't even in unions they work in service, medical, hospitality, non union plants, restaurants, ect. It's just a moderate state in general when you go by population imo. I have seen more people in Michigan care about what matters to them then political parties interest. Everybody I do know that voted for Trump did so because he flat out lied to them and they believed it lol but that's another topic I won't even get into because the mods are watching.
There are some significant southern roots in Michigan. Perhaps more so than any other northern States.
Post WW2 many people from the south came north to work in the auto plants. Virtually all those plants were in Michigan back then. The jobs paid way better than anything back home. My ex-wife's father and Uncle were among those migrants. Ypsilanti was once dubbed Ypsitucky in part for the people in the auto plants with southern roots.
Last edited by craig11152; 05-19-2017 at 06:22 AM..
I can see what your getting at but I have no idea what Minnesota is like so it's hard for me to compare with Mississippi. I thought Minnesota was no different than Wisconsin but I never paid much attention to either state. But I know Michigan isn't like the deep south (except maybe Georgia somewhat), although there are alot of people from the south that live in Michigan.
I never witnessed much inequality in Michigan and I have lived on both sides of the state but I admit I am young. There are a ton of middle class blacks in Michigan that don't even have a college degree. I (as a black man) haven't had any harder of a time getting good paying jobs as a white man in Michigan. Neither has any of my family members or friends who work hard enough. Same story goes for females, I've seen plenty of successful females as well. There is also alot of black owned businesses in Michigan, especially in Detroit.
Most people I talk to in MI smoke weed so they are all for legalizing it, most don't care about gay couples, there is a huge Muslim population here (you see people wearing hijabs everyday), most don't mind immigrants (we do have the largest middle eastern immigrant population in the world), ect. On the flip side most people in MI believe in guns, don't care about organic food, don't like the idea of these new transgender bathrooms, ect.
Michigan is not a deep blue state but it for sure isn't a deep red state either. It's more moderate if anything (although this could all depend on what part of the state you live in of course). Racism and segregation still exist yes but it also exist in places like Los Angeles (as diverse and progressive as Cali is). Most see Chicago as (fairly) progressive and it's the most segregated city in the country. But hey this is only my personal experience, I admit I never been up north but I imagine most rural areas are conservative no matter what state your in. I personally don't believe it has anything to do with unions at all, most democrats I know aren't even in unions they work in service, medical, hospitality, non union plants, restaurants, ect. It's just a moderate state in general when you go by population imo. I have seen more people in Michigan care about what matters to them then political parties interest. Everybody I do know that voted for Trump did so because he flat out lied to them and they believed it lol but that's another topic I won't even get into because the mods are watching.
Well.....that is very optimistic and encouraging that such is your reality.....REALLY. I am in my 50's now....and that has hardly, hardly been the reality that I witnessed and experienced growing up in Michigan, and like you, living on both sides of the state.
My parents are from Mississippi and I now live in Minnesota and have lived in Georgia and visited many states. What I see among the younger generation is very encouraging....but as the old saying goes "if you are not a liberal at 20....then you have no heart. If you are not a conservative by 40, then you have no brain". In other words, I do not know if that liberalism of the younger generation will last once they start families and settle down in careers as professional and business owners. Among the young, liberalism is often a phase, as youth tend to be trend followers more than anything. Hence, they follow whats is popular and what seems cool.
I try to not make judgments about the big picture, based upon my personal experiences. There are 10 million people in Michigan and over 300 million people in the country. Hence, my personal experiences and the people I know represents about .00001% of the whole. If I try to judge the whole based upon what I perceived as true from my experiences with .00001% of the whole, then I would be making an egregious sampling error. Instead, I look at data about the whole, when making claims about the whole, and not my personal experience. The data on Michigan is clear, lots of racial segregation and inequality....among the worst in the nation.
Look at the prominence of Michigan cities in this list. I think this is from 2000 census...but I doubt that the order or rankings have changed much, although the percentages likely have (3 cities in the top 10...note Kalamazoo and Lansing are the best in MI, but in the middle of the pack nationally)
I mean, you are not going to see racism, in this era, like a person did not see the LBGT in the 1950's ( I was not around in the 1950's....but I know it was not accepted then). However, that does not mean that there was any less of a LBGT community then.....they just could not come out in the open about it. In 1950, however, racism was ok and was out the closet. Today, its in the closet because society had made those beliefs unaccepted. It does not mean that its gone. Studies confirm that example. It's no anomaly.
When I say Michigan is more like Mississippi than Minnesota, I mean Minnesota is traditionally a true liberal state, especially in regards to presidential elections. It's moving to the right however. People in Michigan share more conservative beliefs in common with Mississippi....than Minnesota. Maybe I should have said that Michigan is more like Indiana, one of its southern neighbors, instead of Mississippi. Indiana has a lot of conservative people.....but they do not have as strong of labor interest as Michigan. As union membership ranks continue to fall in Michigan, Michigan will more and more show its true conservative color, like Indiana.
The Midwest is kind of the new south in that, based upon data, its the worst place for African Americans, and Michigan is playing the part of Mississippi. That is just how I see it.....and I am a big booster of Michigan....but it is what it is.....but I do finds things are getting better in Michigan.
You know the Bible Belt of the south is said to be strongly linked to the conservatism of the south and why the south votes red. However, African Americans, as a whole, are even more so religious. African Americans, 40 and over, share a lot of conservative beliefs. Again, its the issue of race that keeps them voting democrat because they link the republican party to racism.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 05-19-2017 at 08:02 AM..
Actually I think Hilary won the popular vote in Michigan. But yea there are places far more conservative than Michigan. BUT, Michigan is a pretty big state and as long as you stick to the rural areas you'll be fine. As for cities Macomb county and Grand Rapids are pretty middle of the road where you will probably find both left wings and right wings.
I amnot syaning you are wrong, but the NYT did say trump won the popular vote by .3%. I am curious, why do you think that? Do you beleive the vote counts are wrong? If so why? I have not head anyone assert this before.
I was at a lifetime achievement award the ULI gave John Rakolta last night. He gave an awesome speech, one thrust of which was that this country cannot move forward until we stop attacking each other and completely dismissing outer peoples viewpoints and beliefs out of hand and start at least listening and recognizing their viewpoints also have validity rather than attacking them and immediately determining them to be "stupid" "Uninformed" "unrealistic" flaky whatever. If you realize the focus of the other side and the merit that principal has, it is a start to understanding and communicating with them to find balance. . He pointed out, Democrats are generally most focused on Justice and feel that Republican policies thwart justice. Republicans are more focused on LIberty and feel the Democrat policies are a threat to liberty. I think that is perhaps the most accurate generalization of the basic divide between the two parties I have heard.
He want on to say that when we say the pledge of allegiance we pledge to "libery AND justice for all" If we pledge to is, why can't we live that pledge and open our minds to the concerns and focus of the other side and recognize the need for balance. I found it particularly interesting and a challenge to remember to try to apply every day.
I amnot syaning you are wrong, but the NYT did say trump won the popular vote by .3%. I am curious, why do you think that? Do you beleive the vote counts are wrong? If so why? I have not head anyone assert this before.
I was at a lifetime achievement award the ULI gave John Rakolta last night. He gave an awesome speech, one thrust of which was that this country cannot move forward until we stop attacking each other and completely dismissing outer peoples viewpoints and beliefs out of hand and start at least listening and recognizing their viewpoints also have validity rather than attacking them and immediately determining them to be "stupid" "Uninformed" "unrealistic" flaky whatever. If you realize the focus of the other side and the merit that principal has, it is a start to understanding and communicating with them to find balance. . He pointed out, Democrats are generally most focused on Justice and feel that Republican policies thwart justice. Republicans are more focused on LIberty and feel the Democrat policies are a threat to liberty. I think that is perhaps the most accurate generalization of the basic divide between the two parties I have heard.
He want on to say that when we say the pledge of allegiance we pledge to "libery AND justice for all" If we pledge to is, why can't we live that pledge and open our minds to the concerns and focus of the other side and recognize the need for balance. I found it particularly interesting and a challenge to remember to try to apply every day.
My problem is that each party comes with a tool kit for American issues and problems. Each has different tools, and share some of the same tools. If the Republicans use the screw driver.....everything broken looks like a screw. If the Democrats have the hammer, everything broken looks like a nail. Sometimes what needed to fix something requires a screwdriver, because was lose is a screw. sometimes whats loose is a nail and requires a hammer. Neither side can bring themselves to accept that sometimes the other has the better tool for the situation.
I honestly believe that if Republicans are allowed to run the country for 30 years.....the country would be ruined. I also honestly believe that if the democrats were allowed to run the country for 30 years, it would be ruined. You need balance and you need democrats supporting republican bills and ideals when they best fit the problem and you need republicans supporting democrats bills and ideals when thy best fit the problem. What we have now is purely opposition to the party without regard to the policy and need.
Core cities in America almost always vote democrat. The problem is, however, that the vast, vast majority of the population of most states do not live in principle cities. If you add up the population of Michigan's 5 largest cities, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor, Lansing, Flint...you get about 1.2 million people. However, there are 10 million people in the state. I do not know what those numbers are in regards to voting age population, but the ratio is about the same.
Exactly, the majority of the U.S. now lives in the suburban areas surrounding medium to large principle cities. The metro Grand Rapids areas is close to 1.1 Million with only 200,000 in the principle city. Detroit is very much the same ratio, even moreso, 4.4 Million to 700,000 in Detroit.
That ratio can be found nationally now, except in States where they have very aggressive annexation laws and the principle cities have annexed many of the surrounding suburbs (so the principle city population is skewed compared to their counterparts).
The whole premise of this thread is farce. The OP was just trolling and totally thinks Michigan is a conservative State overall.
If it weren't for the UAW and its long history in Michigan, we'd probably politically align more with Indiana (very conservative).
Exactly, the majority of the U.S. now lives in the suburban areas surrounding medium to large principle cities. The metro Grand Rapids areas is close to 1.1 Million with only 200,000 in the principle city. Detroit is very much the same ratio, even moreso, 4.4 Million to 700,000 in Detroit.
That ratio can be found nationally now, except in States where they have very aggressive annexation laws and the principle cities have annexed many of the surrounding suburbs (so the principle city population is skewed compared to their counterparts).
The whole premise of this thread is farce. The OP was just trolling and totally thinks Michigan is a conservative State overall.
If it weren't for the UAW and its long history in Michigan, we'd probably politically align more with Indiana (very conservative).
Bingo. That is the point that I have been trying to make. Michigan is at heart a conservative state like Indiana, but because of the UAW and other unions, Michigan was blue for awhile. That is changing because Michigan union ranks have been decimated and therefore I would not be surprised that Michigan continues to vote Republican given that Michigan is not one of those states where the minority population growth (which tend to vote democrat) will tilt the state blue in coming years. Without union membership rates above 15% or strong minority growth rates....Michigan will become consistently red.
...Trump was offering something while Hilary was the same old same old....and look what happened to the industry under the same old. ...
I'm no Obama homer. I consider him to have been a mediocre president who inherited a terrible situation from Bush-43, but if I look at what happened under Obama's 8 years of leadership I see 360,000 unemployed Michiganders in 2008, 740,000 in 2009, and 240,000 at the end of 2016 (and before someone makes the argument that real unemployment is actually higher {whatever that means..}, the employment numbers for those 3 dates are 4.59 million, 4.22 million, and 4.61 million - Michigan labor force grew under Obama, not much, but it grew - and it grew by roughly what the state population did). I also see the auto makers posting record profits in 2014, again in 2015, and then once more in 2016, so I'm not terribly sure what is meant by "Look what happened under the same old."
Unless you're indicating that the idea of wealth concentration and the expectation of associated greater capitalist investment creating a situation of trickle down wealth for blue collar workers is objectively stupid, in which case I'd agree. Reaganomics do not work in their intended manner. It incentivizes cheap (overseas) labor while maintaining domestic prices at just the right point where regular people can afford to live, but not thrive. Trump is the ultimate capitalist. He's also the ultimate salesman. He married these two talents of his in order to convince large groups of people that things are terrible and he would make them better with his crony capitalistic agendas.
At this point it's far to early to tell what a Trump economy looks like, and I'm open (and hopeful) to being proven wrong, but my expectation is further wealth concentration for the 1% while the middle and working classes experience the same old story of just barely getting by. If we wanted to see real change we'd look into a situation where one is rewarded fairly and directly for their work and labor, rather than based on what the wealthy capitalist has influenced market conditions to suggest work and labor are worth.
Also, Michigan is not culturally the same as Indiana, Ohio and Non-Chicago Illinois. It is much more culturally similar to Wisconsin and Minnesota. This is due to who settled the areas. The Upper Midwest was settled by New Englanders, who were culturally distinct from the settlers of Greater Appalachia. They held different values, different governments. Michigan is, at its heart, a liberal state - much like Wisconsin and Minnesota - this is due to its New England influence, which has only been moderated by an influx of Southern and Appalachian immigration over the course of the last century, but overall Michigan is still very much a "Yankee" state. That is its roots. There's a great book about this called American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America, if you're interested.
Last edited by Geo-Aggie; 05-19-2017 at 09:08 AM..
I'm no Obama homer. I consider him to have been a mediocre president who inherited a terrible situation from Bush-43, but if I look at what happened under Obama's 8 years of leadership I see 360,000 unemployed Michiganders in 2008, 740,000 in 2009, and 240,000 at the end of 2016 (and before someone makes the argument that real unemployment is actually higher {whatever that means..}, the employment numbers for those 3 dates are 4.59 million, 4.22 million, and 4.61 million - Michigan labor force grew under Obama, not much, but it grew - and it grew by roughly what the state population did). I also see the auto makers posting record profits in 2014, again in 2015, and then once more in 2016, so I'm not terribly sure what is meant by "Look what happened under the same old."
Unless you're indicating that the idea of wealth concentration and the expectation of associated greater capitalist investment creating a situation of trickle down wealth for blue collar workers is objectively stupid, in which case I'd agree. Reaganomics do not work in their intended manner. It incentivizes cheap (overseas) labor while maintaining domestic prices at just the right point where regular people can afford to live, but not thrive. Trump is the ultimate capitalist. He's also the ultimate salesman. He married these two talents of his in order to convince large groups of people that things are terrible and he would make them better with his crony capitalistic agendas.
At this point it's far to early to tell what a Trump economy looks like, and I'm open (and hopeful) to being proven wrong, but my expectation is further wealth concentration for the 1% while the middle and working classes experience the same old story of just barely getting by. If we wanted to see real change we'd look into a situation where one is rewarded fairly and directly for their work and labor, rather than based on what the wealthy capitalist has influenced market conditions to suggest work and labor are worth.
Also, Michigan is not culturally the same as Indiana, Ohio and Non-Chicago Illinois. It is much more culturally similar to Wisconsin and Minnesota. This is due to who settled the areas. The Upper Midwest was settled by New Englanders, who were culturally distinct from the settlers of Greater Appalachia. They held different values, different governments. Michigan is, at its heart, a liberal state - much like Wisconsin and Minnesota - this is due to its New England influence, which has only been moderated by an influx of Southern and Appalachian immigration over the course of the last century, but overall Michigan is still very much a "Yankee" state. That is its roots. There's a great book about this called American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America, if you're interested.
Great post, thanks for sharing.
And also I'll add, without rehashing the entire 2016 election, Hillary received an astounding number of votes for the first woman candidate for President, almost the same amount of votes as Obama's first election (and way more than Trump). She made tactical errors in 3 States which Trump's team exploited. She lost the tactical game but not the overall strategic game, if that makes sense. Many great championship-bound sports programs go down in defeat for not paying attention to their opponent's tactics.
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.
