Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why rural voters don’t vote Democratic anymore
#1
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...l-america/


Quote:U.S. Rep. Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota is one of the last members of a dying breed: the rural conservative Democrat. He has represented Minnesota's 7th Congressional District for a quarter-century, since 1991. The district encompasses most of the western half of the state. It's farm country, a broad swath of fields and open prairie running from the South Dakota border all the way up to Canada.
The people Peterson represents are overwhelmingly white and moderately conservative. According to the Cook Political Report, Peterson was one of nine Democrats sent to Congress from a district that voted for Romney in 2012.
Most counties in Peterson's district swung hard toward Trump this year, by margins of 20, 30, 40 percentage points or more. But Peterson himself still earned 52.5 percent of the vote, enough to head to Congress for a 14th term...



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...l-america/
Reply
#2
Dan, you should share this with the group on fb. Should be interesting.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#3
That's about the best post-mortem of the recent election that I've seen.  It was written by a Democratic representative from a rural area.  He spends a lot of ink on gerrymandering, but thinks Democrats should pay more attention to farming policy, not force urban values on rural folk, and requiring health care buys that folks just can't afford is a problem.

Worth a read.
Reply
#4
Democrats are too socially liberal on abortion and gay marriage.
Reply
#5
(11-25-2016, 01:27 AM)Dan Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...l-america/


Quote:U.S. Rep. Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota is one of the last members of a dying breed: the rural conservative Democrat. He has represented Minnesota's 7th Congressional District for a quarter-century, since 1991. The district encompasses most of the western half of the state. It's farm country, a broad swath of fields and open prairie running from the South Dakota border all the way up to Canada.
The people Peterson represents are overwhelmingly white and moderately conservative. According to the Cook Political Report, Peterson was one of nine Democrats sent to Congress from a district that voted for Romney in 2012.
Most counties in Peterson's district swung hard toward Trump this year, by margins of 20, 30, 40 percentage points or more. But Peterson himself still earned 52.5 percent of the vote, enough to head to Congress for a 14th term...



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...l-america/

Peterson is my congressman and he makes a lot of good points, here. The one on how gerrymandering reinforces the urban "bubble" is one I haven't heard before and it makes complete sense. He also mentions party leaders' unwillingness to compromise on social issues out here in rural areas.

The Dems' lack of ground game on the state level is another thing he mentions, our collapse at the state level out here in Middle America has been catastrophic.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#6
(11-25-2016, 10:22 AM)FLBones Wrote: Democrats are too socially liberal on abortion and gay marriage.

How does someone else's choice impact your life?
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#7
If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#8
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#9
(11-25-2016, 05:41 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes
I am always skeptical about people who say this and that is not real for such and such reason. It is like those people who say you are not a real man or woman because such and such reason. Who gets to define what a man, woman, Democrat or Republican is? We should know it is not black or white. The world is colourful and full of variety....and so are we.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#10
(11-25-2016, 05:41 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes

Democrats can't abandon women's concern for control of their reproduction. However, I believe compromise is possible on this issue. The problem is one of heat rather than light.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#11
(11-25-2016, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 05:41 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes

Democrats can't abandon women's concern for control of their reproduction. However, I believe compromise is possible on this issue. The problem is one of heat rather than light.

Pro-Choice activists need to quit insinuating that any man who is against abortion must be a misogynist who hates women and that any woman who is against abortion must be "brainwashed by patriarchal religion".

Also, I have run into extremists who think I'm a horrible person because I think abortion is a necessary evil rather than a "liberating social good". And these people wonder why they are then accused of being a part of a "culture of death" by folks out here in Middle America...
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#12
(11-26-2016, 12:00 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 05:41 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes

Democrats can't abandon women's concern for control of their reproduction. However, I believe compromise is possible on this issue. The problem is one of heat rather than light.

Pro-Choice activists need to quit insinuating that any man who is against abortion must be a misogynist who hates women and that any woman who is against abortion must be "brainwashed by patriarchal religion".

Also, I have run into extremists who think I'm a horrible person because I think abortion is a necessary evil rather than a "liberating social good". And these people wonder why they are then accused of being a part of a "culture of death" by folks out here in Middle America...

It's too bad we are hung up on these culture wars issues, when they can be solved and it's time to move on. But the two sides seem to be dug in, and it is like a religion to each side.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#13
(11-26-2016, 12:00 PM)Odin Wrote: Pro-Choice activists need to quit insinuating that any man who is against abortion must be a misogynist who hates women and that any woman who is against abortion must be "brainwashed by patriarchal religion".

Also, I have run into extremists who think I'm a horrible person because I think abortion is a necessary evil rather than a "liberating social good". And these people wonder why they are then accused of being a part of a "culture of death" by folks out here in Middle America...

Eminently reasonable. Abortion is a desperate choice -- or at times a medical necessity. I can't imagine anyone seeing abortion as a 'liberating social good' anymore than I can see amputation of a gangrenous limb, a hysterectomy to remove a cancer-filled uterus, or castration of a man with prostate cancer as anything other than a grim necessity.

Some people simply go too far.
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
#14
Posted in another thread, but relevant to this one (but since modified) :

There's a far simpler explanation, and it has nothing to do with rural people being unsophisticated hicks. Rural voters are less sophisticated only to the extent that the Mountain and Deep South are more rural than America on the whole. High-school completion rates are very high in the rural North. Why shouldn't they be? There just aren't many distractions in northern rural areas to cause someone to drop out of school. Unless one wants to stay on the family farm, one will need a college education, so college attendance rates are above average.

It's the difference in the costs of public services and infrastructure. Such basic needs of education and law enforcement are much more expensive in cities than in rural areas. Anyone trained to be a teacher or a cop in rural areas has few alternatives, and will almost certainly be paid far less than his urban counterparts. Cost of living? that's not the whole story, although the cost of living in part reflects the cost of public services and taxes for paying them. An urban teacher has typically a skill set well fitting sales, professional white collar jobs, and blue-collar management. Those opportunities are rare in rural areas. The best predictor of pay is pay in comparable work -- if it is available. Rural areas might have sweat-shop manufacturing or retail and restaurant work, so the farmer's wife who teaches fifth grade doesn't get paid well. Police? Urban police departments must pay the police well so that they do not become de facto employees of gangsters. Law enforcement is thus much more expensive in big cities than in rural areas. Think also of tax collection, courts of law, and the welfare system.

Look also at infrastructure. A four-lane expressway in the Dakotas is typically far less costly to build than a similar expressway in northeastern New Jersey; in fact, such an expressway might be woefully inadequate in northeastern New Jersey, where expansion of a ten-lane expressway to twelve lanes requires expensive condemnation of real estate and dislocation of people and costly relocation of utilities. But a two-lane blacktop (US 83) is apparently adequate for connecting the state capitals of North and South Dakota. An expressway is not built because it is a bargain to build in comparison to a superficially-similar highway somewhere else.

Now another point: government is necessarily much more intrusive in urban areas. If your pet dog craps at the edge a corn field, then nobody knows. If your dog craps on an urban sidewalk, then everyone knows. If the police see you walking away from the scene of the fouling of a sidewalk, then you will get ticketed and you may pay a very steep fine. Government is more intrusive in urban areas, and such is expected, because it is far easier to get in someone else's way. People expect their government to be more costly and intrusive in rural areas. People in rural areas don't like paying taxes to support the higher cost of city dwellers. The low-tax pols, low-service pols are now Republicans, in part because rural folks don't like paying high taxes to support needs in bigger cities. Rural Michigan is about as politically conservative as Oklahoma.
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
#15
(11-26-2016, 12:20 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(11-26-2016, 12:00 PM)Odin Wrote: Pro-Choice activists need to quit insinuating that any man who is against abortion must be a misogynist who hates women and that any woman who is against abortion must be "brainwashed by patriarchal religion".

Also, I have run into extremists who think I'm a horrible person because I think abortion is a necessary evil rather than a "liberating social good". And these people wonder why they are then accused of being a part of a "culture of death" by folks out here in Middle America...

Eminently reasonable. Abortion is a desperate choice -- or at times a medical necessity. I can't imagine anyone seeing abortion as a 'liberating social good' anymore than I can see amputation of a gangrenous limb, a hysterectomy to remove a cancer-filled uterus, or castration of a man with prostate cancer as anything other than a grim necessity.

Some people simply go too far.


Castration is not a treatment for prostate cancer, rather removal of the prostate is--the result is of course impotence. Most hysterectomies are ill advised.

As for abortion I'd liken it less to amputation of a gangrenous limb but more the murder that it actually is. Unfortunately were it illegal they would still be performed anyway, and under far more dangerous circumstances. Except for a small minority of persons, they are the last resort, and as such the solution to limiting this necessary evil lays not in prohibition but rather in economic improvements, promotion of the family--particularly the traditional heterosexual family (nuclear or extended, in fact extended is even better than nuclear), and liberalization of adoption protocols.

As for why rural people do not vote for democrats the answer is clear. The Democratic party doesn't give a shit about them. HRC made that abundantly clear when she essentially called these people a basket of deplorable. The DNC and the Democratic Elites including the ethnic ones live in their own urban coastal bubble.

As a dark skinned homosexual black man I've received more bigotry and racism at the hands of so-called liberals than from any of the deplorable red necks I've been known to run with.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
#16
(11-26-2016, 12:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-26-2016, 12:00 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 06:03 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 05:41 PM)Odin Wrote:
(11-25-2016, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: If Democrats become Republicans, there isn't must point in electing them. Compromise can be wise, but it has its limits.

If health care affordability is a concern, is there any chance that some rural voters will understand that the answer is more socialism, not less? Red state Senate Democrats killed the public option in 2009; would that have made a difference?

So people who are economically liberal but are against abortion are not real Democrats? Rolleyes

Democrats can't abandon women's concern for control of their reproduction. However, I believe compromise is possible on this issue. The problem is one of heat rather than light.

Pro-Choice activists need to quit insinuating that any man who is against abortion must be a misogynist who hates women and that any woman who is against abortion must be "brainwashed by patriarchal religion".

Also, I have run into extremists who think I'm a horrible person because I think abortion is a necessary evil rather than a "liberating social good". And these people wonder why they are then accused of being a part of a "culture of death" by folks out here in Middle America...

It's too bad we are hung up on these culture wars issues, when they can be solved and it's time to move on. But the two sides seem to be dug in, and it is like a religion to each side.

As usual Eric you're oblivious. The only ones interested in still fighting 3T culture war issues are Boomers. Everyone else has moved on a long time ago. One of the reasons (but by no means the main one--the two main ones obviously is the American distain for dynasties and of course her rampant and obvious corruption) HRC lost and Trump won is because she's post seasonal. While Obama is likely pre-seasonal, as he attempted to govern like a Truman or Eisenhower instead of an FDR or Lincoln, McCain was also post-seasonal (and his VP pick was terrible) and Romney was just plain smarmy.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
#17
Boomers are not in need of abortions anymore. They are more concerned about retirement and Medicare.

Donald Trump is seasonal -- if one wants a Crisis Era to go so badly that it will culminate in a violent revolution like one you probably expected to celebrate the centennial of next year.

Donald Trump is stupid enough to believe that the common man can live without a consumer society and not be amenable to Marxist propaganda. make America Great Again -- as perhaps in the 1920s? Sure -- when white ethnics were almost all very poor.

Dynasties? Given the choice between either the Windsor or Borbon y las dos Sicilias dynasty or an all-American fascism, I'd take the royalty any day. But if things go bad enough and the Joint Chiefs of Staff should have to choose between committing war crimes on behalf of the President and a stooge Congress... I might find a coup acceptable so long as the junta gives clear and unambiguous promises to restore democracy with free elections and a promise of a Constitutional Convention.
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
#18
(12-02-2016, 10:19 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for why rural people do not vote for democrats the answer is clear.  The Democratic party doesn't give a shit about them.  HRC made that abundantly clear when she essentially called these people a basket of deplorable.  The DNC and the Democratic Elites including the ethnic ones live in their own urban coastal bubble.

As a dark skinned homosexual black man I've received more bigotry and racism at the hands of so-called liberals than from any of the deplorable red necks I've been known to run with.

Pretty much sums up one of the major issues with the Democrats.

One of the things I always liked about the red necks is that unless you are messing with them they are perfectly content to leave you alone.  Liberals and progressives appear to be genetically incapable of leaving people alone.  The open hostility they have to, among other things, Christianity is one of the the reasons Hillary lost.  Say what you like about Trump, he is not openly hostile to Christianity.
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
#19
(12-03-2016, 03:57 AM)Galen Wrote:
(12-02-2016, 10:19 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for why rural people do not vote for democrats the answer is clear.  The Democratic party doesn't give a shit about them.  HRC made that abundantly clear when she essentially called these people a basket of deplorable.  The DNC and the Democratic Elites including the ethnic ones live in their own urban coastal bubble.

As a dark skinned homosexual black man I've received more bigotry and racism at the hands of so-called liberals than from any of the deplorable red necks I've been known to run with.

Pretty much sums up one of the major issues with the Democrats.

One of the things I always liked about the red necks is that unless you are messing with them they are perfectly content to leave you along.  Liberals and progressives appear to be genetically incapable of leaving people alone.  The open hostility they have to, among other things, Christianity is one of the the reasons Hillary lost.  Say what you like about Trump, he is not openly hostile to Christianity.

Well their politicians oppose abortion for one and want to apply that to everyone. There are others of course but that is one in particular that affects someone in a personal way and on top of it I hear they want to force them to cremate or bury the body. I would consider that a sign that they cannot leave people alone regarding their morality being pushed onto another. Does it apply to individuals who vote right wing? No. Same as left wing. Does not apply to all. But their leaders are both guilty of this. You have said so yourself to me. Neither side gets out of this scot free.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#20
(12-03-2016, 04:56 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(12-03-2016, 03:57 AM)Galen Wrote:
(12-02-2016, 10:19 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for why rural people do not vote for democrats the answer is clear.  The Democratic party doesn't give a shit about them.  HRC made that abundantly clear when she essentially called these people a basket of deplorable.  The DNC and the Democratic Elites including the ethnic ones live in their own urban coastal bubble.

As a dark skinned homosexual black man I've received more bigotry and racism at the hands of so-called liberals than from any of the deplorable red necks I've been known to run with.

Pretty much sums up one of the major issues with the Democrats.

One of the things I always liked about the red necks is that unless you are messing with them they are perfectly content to leave you along.  Liberals and progressives appear to be genetically incapable of leaving people alone.  The open hostility they have to, among other things, Christianity is one of the the reasons Hillary lost.  Say what you like about Trump, he is not openly hostile to Christianity.

Well their politicians oppose abortion for one and want to apply that to everyone. There are others of course but that is one in particular that affects someone in a personal way and on top of it I hear they want to force them to cremate or bury the body. I would consider that a sign that they cannot leave people alone regarding their morality being pushed onto another. Does it apply to individuals who vote right wing? No. Same as left wing. Does not apply to all. But their leaders are both guilty of this. You have said so yourself to me. Neither side gets out of this scot free.

You know there are libertarians that have a problem with abortion as well?  Harry Browne comes to mind, now that I think of it.  I suggest that you read about the various libertarian perspectives on the subject.  You might want to listen to Stefan Molyneux talk about the subject might help you understand why I don't consider the Christian position on the subject as an a priori reason to be hostile to red necks.





In the final analysis red necks tend to be far less intrusive than liberals and progressives.
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


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Be Careful, But Don't Preach About The Virus TheNomad 1 109 03-17-2020, 07:47 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Can The Economy Ever Be 'Good' While So Many Don't Have Walls? TheNomad 58 943 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 1,210 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 0 942 05-09-2018, 07:24 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Watchdog says democratic freedoms waning in US under Trump nebraska 0 429 01-17-2018, 08:20 AM
Last Post: nebraska
  NY rejects state's first 'agri-based' rural charter school in Cortland nebraska 0 392 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 365 109,315 03-28-2017, 02:58 PM
Last Post: David Horn
  [split] I VOTE YES ON CALEXIT! Kinser79 0 635 03-11-2017, 06:26 PM
Last Post: Kinser79

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)