Why Poor Whites Vote Against Their Interests

Why do poor whites vote against their own interests?

Lyndon Johnson once stated:

“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”​

This statement is as true now as it was then. Corporations and their rich overlords want to maintain their power and wealth. In order to do that they must offer (through their politicians and media) 'social status.' You may be poor, but at least you aren't these black cityfolk! Or these immigrants! Or these queerfolk! And by the way... those groups are the real threats to society. Let corporate media distract you with black violence porn and scary anecdotes of bearded transwomen leering at your daughter in the public bathroom. Never mind the corporations and rich siphoning off wealth and security from workers. Never mind them whittling away union power. Sure, right-populists may take notice, and may not be too happy about it. But, in the end, it's all worth it if those 'others' get punished.

Until we acknowledge the problem it will continue to fester.

Geoist said:

Why do poor whites vote against their own interests?

Lyndon Johnson once stated:

“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”​

This statement is as true now as it was then. Corporations and their rich overlords want to maintain their power and wealth. In order to do that they must offer (through their politicians and media) 'social status.' You may be poor, but at least you aren't these black cityfolk! Or these immigrants! Or these queerfolk! And by the way... those groups are the real threats to society. Let corporate media distract you with black violence porn and scary anecdotes of bearded transwomen leering at your daughter in the public bathroom. Never mind the corporations and rich siphoning off wealth and security from workers. Never mind them whittling away union power. Sure, right-populists may take notice, and may not be too happy about it. But, in the end, it's all worth it if those 'others' get punished.

Until we acknowledge the problem it will continue to fester.

Click to expand...

Yep. Richard Nixon was probably the first to realize he could exploit and leverage this country's racism to advance plutocracy. I think he got that idea when he saw Barry Goldwater's unexpected success in the south with his libertarian message of "states' rights". He realized the South was resentful at getting civil rights shoved down its throat, and was more than happy to even step own economic interests if it meant it could go back to keeping blacks as non-citizens. He realized there was a powerful coalition to be made between his plutocrat lobbyists and and these racists. The plutocrats had the money, the racists had the electoral numbers. The racists apparently don't mind living in a plutocratic society, as long as it remains racist; and the plutocrats don't mind living in a racist society, as long as it remains plutocratic.That way each can preserve their own perceived power and privilege in society on the backs of everyone else. Win-win. The modern GOP was born.
Basketful of deplorables: what an apt description.

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."
-Kevin Phillips, chief campaign advisor to Richard Nixon and Republican Party strategist, in 1970

You can see how the GOP had started to pick this up and run with it. Here is Lee Atwater, chief campaign advisor to Ronald Reagan and senior Republican Party strategist, to explain in this 1981 interview:

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 [...] and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster…

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

Geoist said:

This statement is as true now as it was then.

Click to expand...

No, it’s not true. Like all left-wing presidents, LBJ was a racist, a collectivist, and a liar. Painting all low-income white people as gullible racists is typical leftist projection - demeaning the very working class they claim to support.

And let's remember that the people doing the "picking of pockets" aren’t rural hillbillies - they're the elite scumbags in dc.

aociswundumho said:

No, it’s not true. Like all left-wing presidents, LBJ was a racist, a collectivist, and a liar. Painting all low-income white people as gullible racists is typical leftist projection - demeaning the very working class they claim to support.

And let's remember that the people doing the "picking of pockets" aren’t rural hillbillies - they're the elite scumbags in dc.

Click to expand...

The hillbillies don't mind being exploited by the elite scumbags- as long as the society remains racist. And the elite scumbags don't mind living in a racist society, as long as it remains plutocratic. Win-win.

Nixon was the first to realize and exploit this powerful coalition between plutocrats and racists. And he got the idea from Barry Goldwater's surprising, and highly counterintuitive, success in the south with his message of "states' rights". He realized the southerners were furious at the federal government for shoving civil rights down their throats, and would slit their own throat if it meant they could get rid of that tyranny. Nixon realized the plutocrats were happy to oblige. Thus the modern GOP was born.

"As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 [...] and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster…. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites."
-Lee Atwater

aociswundumho said:

No, it’s not true. Like all left-wing presidents, LBJ was a racist, a collectivist, and a liar. Painting all low-income white people as gullible racists is typical leftist projection - demeaning the very working class they claim to support.

And let's remember that the people doing the "picking of pockets" aren’t rural hillbillies - they're the elite scumbags in dc.

Click to expand...

How the GOP won the south:

"In the 1964 presidential election, Goldwater ran a conservative, hawkish campaign that broadly opposed strong action by the federal government. Although he had supported all previous federal civil rights legislation, Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act and championed this opposition during the campaign. He believed that this act was an intrusion of the federal government into the affairs of state; and that the Act interfered with the rights of private people to do business, or not, with whomever they chose, even if the choice is based on racial discrimination.

Goldwater's position appealed to white Southern Democrats and Goldwater was the first Republican presidential candidate since Reconstruction to win the electoral votes of the Deep South states (Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina). Outside the South, Goldwater's negative vote on the Civil Rights Act proved devastating to his campaign... A Lyndon B. Johnson ad called "Confessions of a Republican", which ran in Northern and Western states, associated Goldwater with the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). At the same time, Johnson's campaign in the Deep South publicized Goldwater's support for pre-1964 civil rights legislation. In the end, Johnson swept the election....

Johnson was concerned that his endorsement of civil rights legislation would endanger his party in the South (my personal comment: "and man, did he prove right"). In the 1968 election, Richard Nixon saw the cracks in the Solid South as an opportunity to tap into a group of voters who had historically been beyond the reach of the Republican Party. George Wallace had exhibited a strong candidacy in that election, where he garnered 46 electoral votes and nearly 10 million popular votes, attracting mostly Southern Democrats away from Hubert Humphrey.

Nixon met with southern Republicans and party chairmen, including John Tower and Thurmond, on May 31, 1968, in Atlanta, Georgia, and promised to slow integration efforts and forced busing. Ronald Reagan entered the 1968 primary late and attempted to gain the support of the southern delegations, with Nixon stating that "it was Ronald Reagan who set the hearts of many Southern Republicans aflutter", but the delegations had committed to Nixon and Thurmond helped maintain their support for Nixon.Southern delegates accounted for 46% of the delegates needed to win the nomination at the 1968 convention. Nixon received his highest level of support from the south, which gave him 74% of their vote and accounted for 33% of his overall support.

Nixon wrote in his memoir that the south was the most important region for winning both the nomination and the presidency. Nixon's campaign in the south was managed by Harry S. Dent Sr. and Thurmond. Dent had Nixon used euphemisms in opposition to school desegregation and forced busing."

aociswundumho said:

No, it’s not true. Like all left-wing presidents, LBJ was a racist, a collectivist, and a liar.

Click to expand...

"left-wing presidents" racist... as if implying right-wing presidents weren't, lol. Let's get this straight, there probably wasn't a single American President who WASN'T racist.

aociswundumho said:

Painting all low-income white people as gullible racists is typical leftist projection -

Click to expand...

Except he didn't say all low-income white people were gullible racists, now, did he?

aociswundumho said:

And let's remember that the people doing the "picking of pockets" aren’t rural hillbillies - they're the elite scumbags in dc.

Click to expand...

Nice straw man.

aociswundumho said:

No, it’s not true. Like all left-wing presidents, LBJ was a racist, a collectivist, and a liar. Painting all low-income white people as gullible racists is typical leftist projection - demeaning the very working class they claim to support.

And let's remember that the people doing the "picking of pockets" aren’t rural hillbillies - they're the elite scumbags in dc.

Click to expand...

That is literally the point of the OP. Rural hillbillies are getting their pockets picked by elite scumbags in DC. And those rural hillbillies are voting for them anyway, because they are terrified of immigrants and transwomen.

The American left has long had a condescension problem. It's often why the lose elections without understanding why.

lwf said:

Rural hillbillies are getting their pockets picked by elite scumbags in DC.

Click to expand...

Yes, and who isn't?

aociswundumho said:

Yes, and who isn't?

Click to expand...

Those whose livelihoods depend on the proceeds of that pocket-picking.

aociswundumho said:

Yes, and who isn't?

Click to expand...

That's what happens when you leave powerful rabid dogs free, unregulated, unleashed, and unmuzzled.

Geoist said:

Why do poor whites vote against their own interests?

Lyndon Johnson once stated:

“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”​

This statement is as true now as it was then. Corporations and their rich overlords want to maintain their power and wealth. In order to do that they must offer (through their politicians and media) 'social status.' You may be poor, but at least you aren't these black cityfolk! Or these immigrants! Or these queerfolk! And by the way... those groups are the real threats to society. Let corporate media distract you with black violence porn and scary anecdotes of bearded transwomen leering at your daughter in the public bathroom. Never mind the corporations and rich siphoning off wealth and security from workers. Never mind them whittling away union power. Sure, right-populists may take notice, and may not be too happy about it. But, in the end, it's all worth it if those 'others' get punished.

Until we acknowledge the problem it will continue to fester.

Click to expand...

Given how racist LBJ was, I'm not sure he's the best person to quote.

Here's the thing.

As horrified as I am about everything Trump is doing, i get why white people voted for him.

DEI and Affirmative Action programs don't really impact the rich white people; they impact poor and working-class white people.

I know in my own career, I've been passed up for promotion or full-time hire three times in favor of women or people of color because someone was trying to fill a quota.

In 1994, they promoted a woman because they were fighting off a complaint from EEOC. She was an utter failure, and eventually, I got the promotion anyway.
In 2002, I was in a temp position, and they filled that full-time position with a Chinese H1B.
In 2019, I was in a temp position, and they hired a black woman who was worse than useless.

And these are the ones I know of, I'm not sure how many times I don't know of because it never got past the resume review or interview stage.

So, yeah, when Trump says he's finally going to get rid of DEI and AA, white people will cheer wildly because they should.

Geoist said:

Corporations and their rich overlords want to maintain their power and wealth.

Click to expand...

Are these the same corporations and rich overlords you invest in, thereby helping them maintain their power and wealth?

ataraxia said:

That's what happens when you leave powerful rabid dogs free, unregulated, unleashed, and unmuzzled.

Click to expand...

I think you mean "uncontrolled."

NatMorton said:

The American left has long had a condescension problem. It's often why the lose elections without understanding why.

Click to expand...

Yes. Racists and elite scumbags should be looked on with condescension. But their coalition is extremely powerful and has won. The scumbags have the money, and the racists have the electoral power. And there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point. Whatcha gonna do about it?

aociswundumho said:

Are these the same corporations and rich overlords you invest in, thereby helping them maintain their power and wealth?

Click to expand...

Yes. Unfortunately we have to buy groceries.

The system has won. We submit to our plutocratic overlords. As long as they keep vulnerable minorities away from us.

NatMorton said:

The American left has long had a condescension problem.

Click to expand...

So you don't think half of America isn't being taken advantage of by Democratic politicians/liberal media?

ataraxia said:

How the GOP won the south:

"In the 1964 presidential election, Goldwater ran a conservative, hawkish campaign that broadly opposed strong action by the federal government. Although he had supported all previous federal civil rights legislation, Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act and championed this opposition during the campaign. He believed that this act was an intrusion of the federal government into the affairs of state; and that the Act interfered with the rights of private people to do business, or not, with whomever they chose, even if the choice is based on racial discrimination.

Goldwater's position appealed to white Southern Democrats and Goldwater was the first Republican presidential candidate since Reconstruction to win the electoral votes of the Deep South states (Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina). Outside the South, Goldwater's negative vote on the Civil Rights Act proved devastating to his campaign... A Lyndon B. Johnson ad called "Confessions of a Republican", which ran in Northern and Western states, associated Goldwater with the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). At the same time, Johnson's campaign in the Deep South publicized Goldwater's support for pre-1964 civil rights legislation. In the end, Johnson swept the election....

Johnson was concerned that his endorsement of civil rights legislation would endanger his party in the South (my personal comment: "and man, did he prove right"). In the 1968 election, Richard Nixon saw the cracks in the Solid South as an opportunity to tap into a group of voters who had historically been beyond the reach of the Republican Party. George Wallace had exhibited a strong candidacy in that election, where he garnered 46 electoral votes and nearly 10 million popular votes, attracting mostly Southern Democrats away from Hubert Humphrey.

Nixon met with southern Republicans and party chairmen, including John Tower and Thurmond, on May 31, 1968, in Atlanta, Georgia, and promised to slow integration efforts and forced busing. Ronald Reagan entered the 1968 primary late and attempted to gain the support of the southern delegations, with Nixon stating that "it was Ronald Reagan who set the hearts of many Southern Republicans aflutter", but the delegations had committed to Nixon and Thurmond helped maintain their support for Nixon.Southern delegates accounted for 46% of the delegates needed to win the nomination at the 1968 convention. Nixon received his highest level of support from the south, which gave him 74% of their vote and accounted for 33% of his overall support.

Nixon wrote in his memoir that the south was the most important region for winning both the nomination and the presidency. Nixon's campaign in the south was managed by Harry S. Dent Sr. and Thurmond. Dent had Nixon used euphemisms in opposition to school desegregation and forced busing."

Southern strategy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

Um, okay.

Forced Busing was an absolute disaster. Even Joe Biden criticized it at the time. Not only did white folks hate it, black people weren't too fond of it either.

It made urban public schools even worse, because white folks either moved to the suburbs or enrolled their kids in parochial/private schools.

NatMorton said:

I think you mean "uncontrolled."

Click to expand...

Yeah sure. An uncontrolled rabid dog.

For someone so wary of unchecked government greed, power, and corruption, you sure seem to have the naivete of a young child when it comes to unchecked corporate greed, power, and corruption.

They are prioritizing their cultural interest over their economic interest. They are voting for their interest though.

JoeB131 said:

Um, okay.

Forced Busing was an absolute disaster. Even Joe Biden criticized it at the time. Not only did white folks hate it, black people weren't too fond of it either.

It made urban public schools even worse, because white folks either moved to the suburbs or enrolled their kids in parochial/private schools.

Click to expand...

Yeah sure. Even more evidence of the burning hate and racism driving all this. Thanks for that example.

Geoist said:

Why do poor whites vote against their own interests?

Lyndon Johnson once stated:

“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”​

This statement is as true now as it was then. Corporations and their rich overlords want to maintain their power and wealth. In order to do that they must offer (through their politicians and media) 'social status.' You may be poor, but at least you aren't these black cityfolk! Or these immigrants! Or these queerfolk! And by the way... those groups are the real threats to society. Let corporate media distract you with black violence porn and scary anecdotes of bearded transwomen leering at your daughter in the public bathroom. Never mind the corporations and rich siphoning off wealth and security from workers. Never mind them whittling away union power. Sure, right-populists may take notice, and may not be too happy about it. But, in the end, it's all worth it if those 'others' get punished.

Until we acknowledge the problem it will continue to fester.

Click to expand...

Your proof of this is a Democrat talking about how he will pick their pockets? Nice.

It does describe the Dumbo-crat mindset. They do convince these white Karen's that in speaking to the manager, they are the savior of everyone Those Karen's will be happy to empty their pockets while they look down at you.

We see this all the time from the libtards. They have a spare bedroom and can type their snide replies about how everyone who doesn't think and do as they demand is beneath them and they are just better than them.

Way to prove that the Lyndon/Dumbocrat tactics are still valid and work on Libtards today!

ataraxia said:

Yes. Racists and elite scumbags should be looked on with condescension. But their coalition is extremely powerful and has won. The scumbags have the money, and the racists have the electoral power. And there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point. Whatcha gonna do about it?

Click to expand...

Exactly my point. You see those who disagree with you politically as racists and/or scumbags. Because of that, you'll never understand them, and thus never understand why you lose elections to them.

ataraxia said:

Yes. Unfortunately we have to buy groceries.

Click to expand...

Now that I'm thinking about, I recall you also bragging about how much money you've made in the stock market by investing in the evil corporations and rich overlords that you claim to despise.

I'm not going to bother searching, but I'm pretty sure it was you.

Geoist said:

So you don't think half of America isn't being taken advantage of by Democratic politicians/liberal media?

Click to expand...

No, I think half of America (more, actually) have different political views than do I.