Dramatic realignment swings working-class districts toward GOP

[Chomsky]

And the suburbs are going blue. That would have been unthinkable two decades ago.

Party affiliations shift over time.

Yep. We saw something similar in the sixties & seventies in Nixon's Southern Strategy.

 

[Chomsky]

The Democrat Party is the working man's party.

But ever since Reagan's time, the GOP has been using the working class' latent racism to cut taxes to their plutocrat sponsors. The GOP today is just a devil's bargain between those two groups: the plutocrats provide the money to keep racism and bigotry alive, and the racists provide the votes to cut taxes to the plutocrats (on their own backs if necessary). Win-win. Given the choice between being helped as a working man and losing the racism, obviously the racism wins.

Otherwise, there is no reason for the working class to be working this hard to make sure they get education investments cut for themselves and their own children, to get investment in job retraining cut for themselves so they can no longer compete in a 21st century world, to cut healthcare for themselves and their families, etc, etc....

It's hard not to see stuff like this, and not think "what idiots". They vote for the guy who promises to cut their healthcare, and then worry about their healthcare, LOL. It would be funny if it was not so sad.

Good post. Video, too.

 

[Chomsky]

It's interesting that Trump is Reagan's heir in a real sense.

Absolutely!

Why? He was the only good President in a 20 year period.

Don't get me wrong, I like the man.

But he did two of the most atrocious things to the country, things I can forgive him for:

- Trickledown Economics
- War on Drugs

Two things inflicted upon the American People that cause them immense suffering and should never have come to be.

I was young, naive, and got carried away by Reagan's persona & message. As his term went on and he enacted legislation, I was shocked - literally shocked - at his attacks on our personal freedoms.

But even then, I went back to the GOP well again with HW, who I still like until today.

 

[Rexedgar]

These traits elect too many of our leaders, imo.

It's interesting that Trump is Reagan's heir in a real sense.


Why? He was the only good President in a 20 year period.


It's true that old school--Mills, Locke--liberals are found in the Republican party these days.

Still, the big difference is that Reagan was smooth and charismatic and Trump isn't.

 

[Chomsky]

If the Democratic party focused on helping working class people of all colors and less on extreme identity politics ideology, they would be unstoppable. As I've said before, the Democrats have the right policies and the most popular policies in most cases, but they keep tripping themselves up over Frankfurt School-derived ideology and "symbolism".

I agree. Identity politics is what, in part, drove me away from being a Dem Party member, even though I've still been exclusively voting Dem at the national level since my vote for Obama's first.

 

[Jay59]

Absolutely!

Don't get me wrong, I like the man.

But he did two of the most atrocious things to the country, things I can forgive him for:

- Trickledown Economics
- War on Drugs

Two things inflicted upon the American People that cause them immense suffering and should never have come to be.

I was young, naive, and got carried away by Reagan's persona & message. As his term went on and he enacted legislation, I was shocked - literally shocked - at his attacks on our personal freedoms.

But even then, I went back to the GOP well again with HW, who I still like until today.

I am not sure where you get the trickledown economics, but it does not fit the bill. Reagan did supply side economics which is very different. It also sort of worked.

The war on drugs is a lot older than Reagan. Still, I agree. We need to make addiction a health issue not a criminal issue.

Regardless, RR was the only decent President of the 70s or the 80s.

These traits elect too many of our leaders, imo.

It's in the job description.

 

[Fletch]

Well for one, they represent culture warriors, place party over country, demonize anyone who does not share their views, are not remotely committed to financial conservatism and loathe inclusiveness.

(In before you claim I just described modern day liberals).

So you describe the democrats then try and prevent me from pointing that out. Typical dishonest leftist reply.

 

[Fletch]

The Democrat Party is the working man's party.

No it isnt, as the Op points out. The rest of your post is just garbage.

 

[Fletch]

I am not sure where you get the trickledown economics, but it does not fit the bill. Reagan did supply side economics which is very different. It also sort of worked.

The war on drugs is a lot older than Reagan. Still, I agree. We need to make addiction a health issue not a criminal issue.

Regardless, RR was the only decent President of the 70s or the 80s.


It's in the job description.

The top tax rate when Reagan took office was 73%. He believed that cutting that rate would stimulate growth. Which it did. The problem with republicans since is they keep repeating that same message. But taxes today are NOT too high. They are, in fact, too low.

 

[Jay59]

The top tax rate when Reagan took office was 73%. He believed that cutting that rate would stimulate growth. Which it did. The problem with republicans since is they keep repeating that same message. But taxes today are NOT too high. They are, in fact, too low.

Taxes are too high but spending is higher still.

Neither party shows any interesting in slowing spending down, much less fixing the problem.

 

[Craig234]

I very much lament Dems ceding away much of the blue-collar working-class, particularly the older Caucasian subset. The good news is Biden seems to be making strides with the unions, which I applaud.

There are still unions?

 

[Fletch]

Taxes are too high but spending is higher still.

Neither party shows any interesting in slowing spending down, much less fixing the problem.

You cant get to $31 trillion in debt if taxes are too high. And you are right, no one is prepared to cut a penny.

 

[Craig234]

Oh, of course I forgot the biggest difference between Reagon conservatives and current: currently conservatives support a reprehensible, pathologically lying scum bag- more like worship.

That's not as much a distinction as you seem to think. Current are worse, but both are terrible and there are a lot of similarities.

 

[Fletch]

There are still unions?

Not many. Only 6% of the private workforce is unionized, and even they dont have the loyalty to the democrats that they once did.

 

[Craig234]

I agree. Identity politics is what, in part, drove me away from being a Dem Party member, even though I've still been exclusively voting Dem at the national level since my vote for Obama's first.

What, exactly, are 'identity politics'? One thing the phrase is, is a propaganda attack on Democrats. What exactly is it to you? Is it saying women voters have issues to recognize? That black voters do? That Hispanic voters do? That disabled voters do? Does it not apply to white grievance used for Republican votes, why not?

 

[Jay59]

You cant get to $31 trillion in debt if taxes are too high.

Of course you can.

And you are right, no one is prepared to cut a penny.

That's life.

 

[bomberfox]

I agree. Identity politics is what, in part, drove me away from being a Dem Party member, even though I've still been exclusively voting Dem at the national level since my vote for Obama's first.

Problem is if you only focus on working class economic issues theres still a lot of folks you leave out who arent rich and wealthy but in fact are working class who would like to not be beaten to death.

White working class folks might have to learn they aint the only people that matter and the culture of licking the boot of the southern aristocracy isnt going to make things better.

This is where intersectionality comes in but thats a dirty word to moderate dems who forgot about the 60s apparently….

 

[brianpatrick]

In our economy the “working-class” moniker used to be something else as well, and very quickly with the introduction of AI and other tech advances, it will drastically change again—only this time, more. . I have no idea if conservatives will be getting a productive, hard-working, skilled labor force, or a giant bag of unemployable obsolescence.

Fading fast are the days when you can just start swinging a hammer with dad in the summers, and end up with a good career. College is not necessary to make a good living in the US, nor was it ever on an individual level, but more and more it will be necessary.

 

[jnug]

The real 'driver' is that the left is no longer interested in the working man. They have become the party of coastal elites, universities, climate change and gender. They see the working, high school educzated middle class laborer as an idiot. Thats why they are losing them.

A bit of an overripe take IMO.

The working man has to be alive to work and he does not want his kids shot up by guns he likely would struggle to afford. Plus the term "working man" is a bit dated. Working women have a considerable impact on the outcome of elections these days.

The entire J6 Trumpanzee crowd is literally wallowing in people with too much time on their hands and too much money for their own good. They might not fall into some easy category like elitist but they are way too well off to be categorized as "working men" in the traditional sense of that term. More likely to be small businessmen and contractors of some sort.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I'll just add: Many of the older Caucasians lost were Catholics.

Dems have a quandary with Catholics, as the Party promotes many Catholic social-economic policies (feed the poor, house the poor, dignity of work, social-justice, redemption, etc.). But they also promote two big-time Catholic anathemas - abortion & homosexuality/transsexualism.

I don't see how the conflicts above can easily be resolved.

PROMOTE??
I fail to see how wanting the government to just leave these groups alone and allow them the same rights as any other human being translates to PROMOTING unless you filter it through a MAGA translation device of some kind.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It's interesting that Trump is Reagan's heir in a real sense.

 

[Craig234]

Here's another theory about it: right-wing propaganda targets the people who they can best fool, and 'working class' people are easier to fool than 'educated' people, so they get targeted and it works.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

And the suburbs are going blue. That would have been unthinkable two decades ago.

Party affiliations shift over time.

Plant enough Michelle Bachmanns and Marjorie Taylor-Greenes and it's bound to trigger a backlash.

 

[Simpletruther]

Dramatic realignment swings working-class districts toward GOP

"Republicans were the party of the country club, and they're increasingly the party of country."

www.axios.com

[Distribution chart included in the article]

--

Just as the sixties saw a reversal of party affiliation with the Southern Segregationists, we now seem to being seeing a reversal of party affiliation in terms of economic demography.
--

Interestingly, the article suggests the real driver may be education, with income reflecting the level of education - with income being "downstream" from education.

But whatever's going-on, the correlation between income/education and party affiliation appears to be strong.

--

"May you live in interesting times!"

I think republicans make more income on average.

 

[Simpletruther]

PROMOTE??
I fail to see how wanting the government to just leave these groups alone and allow them the same rights as any other human being translates to PROMOTING unless you filter it through a MAGA translation device of some kind.

No other group has a right to compete against an inferior strength sex.