What can be done to get more conservative voters in major Texan cities? (Houston: crime, tax)

[tmtex]

West coast liberals are moving here in droves

[turf3]

If conservatives want to attract more city voters then they need to make the case that their policies will work to the benefit of said voters.


When you think about it, it's really pretty simple, isn't it?

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

If conservatives want to succeed, then they are better of placing stronger emphasis on free-market, and other Libertarian ideals. The religious ideals, as well as fear-driven policies (i.e. anti-immigration, anti-LGBT, etc ) are sinking ships that should be dropped on the spot.

On this we agree.

Im all for hearing conservative arguments on issues like the 2nd amendment, the economy, or immigration. But the second a person uses the phrase "In the Bible..." for their arguement, Im completely uninterested because there will be nothing of value to follow politically.

Its not the right that I take issue with, its the religious right.

[supfromthesite]

Free market + immigration should be the direction

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by supfromthesite

Free market + immigration should be the direction

I consider myself liberal and free trade is a huge deal for me. The conservative view is and should be free trade. It was traditionally liberals that were opposed to free trade. It wasnt until Trump that conservatives became opposed to free trade. He uses that trade defect to make his argument but thats literally not how this works. America is a nation of consumers. We consumer way more than we produce. Therefore, imports are very vital for us. China is the opposite. They produce way more than they consume.

[Westerner92]

The conservative/liberal divide is just a proxy for the rural/urban divide, and the suburbs are where the two interact.

People in lower density areas trend conservative, where publicly owned space doesn't play as prominent a role in day-to-day life, where interaction with strangers isn't as common, especially strangers who don't have a similar background to you. General social order is maintained through religious traditions, and those who don't conform are usually far enough from their neighbors that they're ignored and generally perceived to be non-threatening. Negative externalities of individual actions are unlikely to be very visible.

People who live in higher density areas trend liberal, where publicly owned spaces and interactions with large numbers of people from different backgrounds play a large role in day-to-day life. General social order is maintained through law enforcement, and inequalities and non-conformity among large communities interacting together is often a source of instability. Lots of laws, public property, public debate, and social equality discussions are needed to come to a consensus and mitigate negative externalities of millions of individual actions.

The suburbs are where both of the above paradigms can exist side-by-side.

Asking how to get more conservatives to cities is a philosophically nonviable question, because the answer is that conservative people don't like cities and don't want to accept the mentality it takes to live close to millions of people. It's like asking what could be done to get more rainbow trout to move to coral reefs.

[lonestar2007]

Originally Posted by Westerner92

The conservative/liberal divide is just a proxy for the rural/urban divide, and the suburbs are where the two interact.

People in lower density areas trend conservative, where publicly owned space doesn't play as prominent a role in day-to-day life, where interaction with strangers isn't as common, especially strangers who don't have a similar background to you. General social order is maintained through religious traditions, and those who don't conform are usually far enough from their neighbors that they're ignored and generally perceived to be non-threatening. Negative externalities of individual actions are unlikely to be very visible.

People who live in higher density areas trend liberal, where publicly owned spaces and interactions with large numbers of people from different backgrounds play a large role in day-to-day life. General social order is maintained through law enforcement, and inequalities and non-conformity among large communities interacting together is often a source of instability. Lots of laws, public property, public debate, and social equality discussions are needed to come to a consensus and mitigate negative externalities of millions of individual actions.

The suburbs are where both of the above paradigms can exist side-by-side.

Asking how to get more conservatives to cities is a philosophically nonviable question, because the answer is that conservative people don't like cities and don't want to accept the mentality it takes to live close to millions of people. It's like asking what could be done to get more rainbow trout to move to coral reefs.

In other words, a conservative doesn't like being just another one in the herd?

[Trainwreck20]

Originally Posted by lonestar2007

In other words, a conservative doesn't like being just another one in the herd?

No, they just prefer a different herd .

[lonestar2007]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

No, they just prefer a different herd .

[Westerner92]

Originally Posted by lonestar2007

In other words, a conservative doesn't like being just another one in the herd?

That's basically going out of the way to misunderstand. A herd with mostly the same ancestry, same religious norms, and less contact with their neighbors is less likely to be impacted by others' actions. Any disputes can be handled by their common religious values. That's not the same as rugged individualism, a mentality that only works if you're subsistence farming on a frontier.