Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why rural voters don’t vote Democratic anymore
#61
(12-05-2016, 12:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 12:00 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: why didn't you vote for Johnson? What kind of Libertarian are you? Undecided

As governor of New Mexico, Johnson increased the state budget by 75%.  That's pretty much the opposite of libertarian, no matter what party nominates him.

Are you sure? I don't remember that being his record. He vetoed most spending bills.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#62
(12-05-2016, 12:00 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Assuming you are in Oregon your Trump vote was a wasted vote. Since any vote you made other than Clinton would have been a wasted vote (and given the outsized support for Clinton in OR, even that vote might have been considered wasted) why didn't you vote for Johnson? What kind of Libertarian are you? Undecided

Johnson and Weld are simply retread republicans which is something the LP has been attracted to in recent years.  Weld's support for Hillary also did not help matters.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#63
(12-05-2016, 08:58 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-04-2016, 10:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Perhaps the Democrats have some issues that would appeal to some of them, like to Rust Belt voters who didn't get the message of what the Democrats can do to improve their lives and their income.

I love it when you guys think your problem is the "messaging", rather than the policies.

I know you'd say that. Of course, the Democratic policies are WAY, WAY better by astronomical levels. But is it the messaging? Or is it that Americans don't get the message? As I said, Americans are responsible for how they vote. If people are hooked on libertarian economics (as you are) or Christian fundamentalism, then that is their problem, not the problem of the Democrats.

The other point is that it COULD very well be a messaging problem, when the margin is 70,000 votes in 3 rust-best states. The message from Hillary did not get through to people having hard times in those states. Many of them were also social conservative, anti-big government, etc. But with a margin that close, there would have been plenty who would have voted Democratic had Hillary been more convincing than Trump on the economic issues, and in general a better candidate.

Not addressed to non-believers like you Warren, but for whoever may be interested:

I did another new tally to add to my data base last week, and as well I had made the mistake before the election of figuring Clinton winning and Trump losing into the data base. My revised horoscope scores are, as of now, Trump 9-3 and Hillary 9-11. Hillary could not have won with that negative score. My prediction was also based on other positions in her chart that had a good track record as far as empirical data is concerned, although the sample sizes were small with these indicators. But her chart was never considered definitive; questions about her birth time remain. 

Also, I assumed that the New Moon before the election indicated the party in power would win, because it almost always indicates the popular vote winner. It did in 2000, but I didn't assume that such a fluke would occur this year. But it did, again, in the same way. The new moon method indeed predicted the popular vote winner: the party in power.

So I got the election prediction wrong, but it was a tough one to call.

If Trump's score holds, and Andrew Jacksons's score remains the same, it is interesting now that they have the same score. They are quite a bit alike.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#64
(12-05-2016, 03:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 12:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 12:00 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: why didn't you vote for Johnson? What kind of Libertarian are you? Undecided

As governor of New Mexico, Johnson increased the state budget by 75%.  That's pretty much the opposite of libertarian, no matter what party nominates him.

Are you sure? I don't remember that being his record. He vetoed most spending bills.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/43...ves-beware

Much of the spending increase may have been through ineffectiveness rather than intent, but either way, his government grew, and as president, it's likely the same would have happened.
Reply
#65
(12-06-2016, 05:03 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 03:29 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 12:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: As governor of New Mexico, Johnson increased the state budget by 75%.  That's pretty much the opposite of libertarian, no matter what party nominates him.

Are you sure? I don't remember that being his record. He vetoed most spending bills.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/43...ves-beware

Much of the spending increase may have been through ineffectiveness rather than intent, but either way, his government grew, and as president, it's likely the same would have happened.

Either way he either can't or won't do the job of reducing the size and scope of government.  That has been the problem with the LP's recent picks.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#66
So apparently the solution is to give all power to the Master Class?

Economic elites have rarely proved trustworthy with unrestrained power.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#67
A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy. Those who wish to minimize the size and scope of government are either elites or are people like Galen who are duped by pro-elite ideologies.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#68
(12-03-2016, 10:17 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: The religious right and the atheist left would no doubt each love to use government to force their views on each other.  However, the gun issue doesn't work the same way, which is why I highlighted it.

On many such issues you can see someone claiming a right to live free, and another trying to prevent an evil using government authority.  The right to chose and the right to keep and bear can be seen as rights where one is and ought to be free to choose.  Gun deaths and the deaths of the unborn can be seen as evils.  If you wish to restrict the conversation to one issue only, sure, go ahead, but I'm not so inclined.  

These are but two of many issues separating the rural and urban populations.  I would like to nudge things in the direction of freedom and rights, and away from quashing evils when there is sizable and intense disagreement on whether the evil is truly evil or not.

I would think a lot of Libertarians would lean the same way.

(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [Image: 1-libertarian-government-conspiracy.jpg]

I would take exception to describing the libertarian conspiracy as 'vast'.
I wouldn't underestimate the size of the r-libertarian coalition that is now taking shape. Think about it. Kinser and Classic, a gay black man and a straight white guy, a Marxist and an American capitalist, a cosmopolitan and a suburbanite, a believer and a non believer united and now perceived/seen as being on the same side. I don't have a problem with Democratic voters being allowed inside the Republican tent. I don't have a problem with people like Kinser being allowed in the Republican tent either. The Republican door swings both ways. The Republican door doesn't lock behind you and force you stay inside. I have more issues with the progressive minded blue base than I've had had with Kinser himself.
 Kinser isn't a Marxist anymore. Marxists are extremists, as are their counterparts on the Right like Nazis and White Supremacists. For some reason they seem able to shift from one extreme to another without ever going through the middle.  Most folks, like me and I suspect you move from point A to point B by traveling though the terrain in between.  He don't just start at one point in one instant and appear at another in the next.  But folks like Kinser do.
Reply
#69
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.
Reply
#70
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.
Funny how the lefties miss that.  It would do Odin much good to contemplate what Lord Acton had to say about power.  Every abusive rich person I ever knew first bought himself some government officials first.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#71
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.

LOL, Bill was born Arkansas white trash, he would have never become president in the first place if the US were a full-blown oligarchy. Rolleyes

Comparing the Bushes and the Clintons is a moronic comparison.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#72
(12-07-2016, 08:14 AM)Odin Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.

LOL, Bill was born Arkansas white trash, he would have never become president in the first place if the US were a full-blown oligarchy. Rolleyes

Comparing the Bushes and the Clintons is a moronic comparison.

Given Bill's habits he would actually make a very good hand puppet for the New England establishment.  I am pretty sure that his speaking fees were the payoff after the fact.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#73
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.

That you mention this as a reply to the point that the government protects us from elites, is incredibly short sighted. The government and what it does to protect us is a lot more than who is president. And the policies count rather than if a president is son of a former one (Bush/Bush). The Bush policies furthered the oligarchy; the Clinton's policies would have protected us from it. For sure. 

And Hillary did not succeed in creating a husband-wife team, whatever that might mean in terms of an oligarchy (it means nothing). The real issue here you mention is dynasty, not oligarchy. In that regard, keep your eye on Donald Trump and Ivanka.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#74
(12-06-2016, 05:09 PM)Mikebert Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 10:17 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: The religious right and the atheist left would no doubt each love to use government to force their views on each other.  However, the gun issue doesn't work the same way, which is why I highlighted it.

On many such issues you can see someone claiming a right to live free, and another trying to prevent an evil using government authority.  The right to chose and the right to keep and bear can be seen as rights where one is and ought to be free to choose.  Gun deaths and the deaths of the unborn can be seen as evils.  If you wish to restrict the conversation to one issue only, sure, go ahead, but I'm not so inclined.  

These are but two of many issues separating the rural and urban populations.  I would like to nudge things in the direction of freedom and rights, and away from quashing evils when there is sizable and intense disagreement on whether the evil is truly evil or not.

I would think a lot of Libertarians would lean the same way.

(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [Image: 1-libertarian-government-conspiracy.jpg]

I would take exception to describing the libertarian conspiracy as 'vast'.
I wouldn't underestimate the size of the r-libertarian coalition that is now taking shape. Think about it. Kinser and Classic, a gay black man and a straight white guy, a Marxist and an American capitalist, a cosmopolitan and a suburbanite, a believer and a non believer united and now perceived/seen as being on the same side. I don't have a problem with Democratic voters being allowed inside the Republican tent. I don't have a problem with people like Kinser being allowed in the Republican tent either. The Republican door swings both ways. The Republican door doesn't lock behind you and force you stay inside. I have more issues with the progressive minded blue base than I've had had with Kinser himself.
 Kinser isn't a Marxist anymore. Marxists are extremists, as are their counterparts on the Right like Nazis and White Supremacists. For some reason they seem able to shift from one extreme to another without ever going through the middle.  Most folks, like me and I suspect you move from point A to point B by traveling though the terrain in between.  He don't just start at one point in one instant and appear at another in the next.  But folks like Kinser do.
I bet he's still a Marxist at heart. Kinser doesn't have any interest in the Nazi's and White Supremacists. Come on, a gay black guy isn't going to join forces with them for obvious reasons. I eventually got into it with one of them not so long ago. It wasn't a pretty exchange as usual. Kinser is a much better writer than me.
Reply
#75
You can trust that rural voters will start turning against Trump and Pence when their precious kids start coming back in body bags from wars that Donald Trump gets into by starting Wars for Profit that don't go well for Americans who do the fighting.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#76
(12-07-2016, 08:44 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 05:09 PM)Mikebert Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 10:17 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: The religious right and the atheist left would no doubt each love to use government to force their views on each other.  However, the gun issue doesn't work the same way, which is why I highlighted it.

On many such issues you can see someone claiming a right to live free, and another trying to prevent an evil using government authority.  The right to chose and the right to keep and bear can be seen as rights where one is and ought to be free to choose.  Gun deaths and the deaths of the unborn can be seen as evils.  If you wish to restrict the conversation to one issue only, sure, go ahead, but I'm not so inclined.  

These are but two of many issues separating the rural and urban populations.  I would like to nudge things in the direction of freedom and rights, and away from quashing evils when there is sizable and intense disagreement on whether the evil is truly evil or not.

I would think a lot of Libertarians would lean the same way.

(12-03-2016, 08:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [Image: 1-libertarian-government-conspiracy.jpg]

I would take exception to describing the libertarian conspiracy as 'vast'.
I wouldn't underestimate the size of the r-libertarian coalition that is now taking shape. Think about it. Kinser and Classic, a gay black man and a straight white guy, a Marxist and an American capitalist, a cosmopolitan and a suburbanite, a believer and a non believer united and now perceived/seen as being on the same side. I don't have a problem with Democratic voters being allowed inside the Republican tent. I don't have a problem with people like Kinser being allowed in the Republican tent either. The Republican door swings both ways. The Republican door doesn't lock behind you and force you stay inside. I have more issues with the progressive minded blue base than I've had had with Kinser himself.
 Kinser isn't a Marxist anymore. Marxists are extremists, as are their counterparts on the Right like Nazis and White Supremacists. For some reason they seem able to shift from one extreme to another without ever going through the middle.  Most folks, like me and I suspect you move from point A to point B by traveling though the terrain in between.  He don't just start at one point in one instant and appear at another in the next.  But folks like Kinser do.
I bet he's still a Marxist at heart. Kinser doesn't have any interest in the Nazi's and White Supremacists. Come on, a gay black guy isn't going to join forces with them for obvious reasons. I eventually got into it with one of them not so long ago. It wasn't a pretty exchange as usual. Kinser is a much better writer than me.

Even I agree with you on Kinser except that I see no heart in him. I think he supports Donald Trump because he will make America so corrupt, inequitable, and otherwise miserable that it will be ripe for a Socialist insurrection of his choosing. He may see Donald Trump as America's equivalent of Fulgencio Batista.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#77
Something I've noticed is that even in this election the parts of the rural Midwest Colin Woodard have as part of Yankeedom are significantly less Republican than other rural areas. Given that the Democrats have replaced the Republicans as the "Yankee" party that I expect that as older, more socially conservative voters begin to die that rural Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan will become more Democratic. Hell, Even Obama did very well in rural Wisconsin (he won almost every country in 2008) and Clinton's failure there was because she was such a terrible, tone-deaf candidate. Ironic given that Wisconsin is the birthplace of the Republican Party.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#78
(12-07-2016, 08:14 AM)Odin Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.

LOL, Bill was born Arkansas white trash, he would have never become president in the first place if the US were a full-blown oligarchy. Rolleyes

I'm not saying we were already an oligarchy in 1992; that was a long time ago.  We are now, though.

Putting government in charge of protecting the people from the economic elites is definitely a fox guarding the hen house situation.
Reply
#79
(12-06-2016, 11:28 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: So apparently the solution is to give all power to the Master Class?

Economic elites have rarely never proved trustworthy with unrestrained power.

Fixed that for you.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#80
(12-06-2016, 11:09 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 04:41 PM)Odin Wrote: A strong government is a necessary protector of the masses against elites wishing to create an outright oligarchy.

Oh come on.  GHWBush then GWBush then Jeb?  Bill then Hillary then Chelsea?  The government was already an outright oligarchy, hereditary no less.

Democracy can't guarantee us that stupidity won't happen, but it makes it possible to avoid it.  Without it, plutocrats and oligarchs have free reign.  Since power abhors a vacuum, and you are recommending just that, then you must be OK with the plutocrats and oligarchs.

FWIW, we tried Feudalism, and it didn't work all that well for the 99.9%.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Be Careful, But Don't Preach About The Virus TheNomad 1 108 03-17-2020, 07:47 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Can The Economy Ever Be 'Good' While So Many Don't Have Walls? TheNomad 58 904 03-16-2020, 12:49 PM
Last Post: beechnut79
  Please Just Don't Change? TheNomad 2 177 03-15-2020, 12:01 PM
Last Post: Bob Butler 54
  Ohio lawmakers vote to give themselves a pay raise Unicorn 18 1,200 12-10-2019, 06:09 AM
Last Post: nvfd
  5/8/18 -- Women win 17 of 20 Democratic nominations for open seats for Congress pbrower2a 0 940 05-09-2018, 07:24 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Watchdog says democratic freedoms waning in US under Trump nebraska 0 426 01-17-2018, 08:20 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  NY rejects state's first 'agri-based' rural charter school in Cortland nebraska 0 391 12-28-2017, 03:05 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  Vote to impeach Trump and risk death, adviser says nebraska 0 510 12-26-2017, 08:08 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  I VOTE YES ON CALEXIT! Eric the Green 365 109,148 03-28-2017, 02:58 PM
Last Post: David Horn
  [split] I VOTE YES ON CALEXIT! Kinser79 0 634 03-11-2017, 06:26 PM
Last Post: Kinser79

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)