I'm not remotely close to a political junkie, but isn't it claimed that the Rs are doing better amongst lower-income whites than they used to? Regardless, I can't imagine that there's all THAT many D politicians who can afford to not worry about what lower-income whites think about them.
Either way, as mentioned previously, I find the following quite plausible: "I'm a poor/lower-income white who's LESS inclined to vote for Ds because they often seem to be MORE concerned about poverty/low-income amongst various minorities than they are about MY poverty/low-income."
And way too many of these folks are easy pickings for the Trumps of the world....
Yes, more poor white people are voting Republican today than previously. It’s a trend that has been occurring since the 1960s and I think a lot of it can be attributed to the increase in racist dog whistling rhetoric used by Republican politicians like Nixon and Reagan that didn’t age very well. I think the Democrats are on the better side of this going forward.
Maybe it's because the IRS last year was going after the poor more than anyone else - including poor whites.
Right, but my point (whether or not it applies to intersectionality, I don't know), in part, is that there isn't always necessarily more than 1 problem. There are terribly complex problems, and far less complex (if not fixable) problems. If one thinks that something is multi-variable, fine, tackle many or all of them. But that probably won't always be the case, or at least not clearly and/or dominantly.
I'm guessing that poverty might be really good example. Tons of problems/challenges stemming from poverty. And PERHAPS, dominantly at least, poverty ALONE.
And where that is likely the case, I think that liberals likely LOSE support when they want to "bring in" a host of other variables (race, ethnicity, gender, persuasion, etc.) that seem dubious and/or much less significant.
Maybe liberals lose general support by proclaiming to fight against racism and sexism, although people of color and women vote democrat, so I’m not so sure it loses them support. I believe that the liberals have already won the culture war and being vehemently against racism and sexism (even if it’s just in theory) is probably good for their chances of winning going forward. Old white men aren’t getting any younger or healthier either.
Although in reality, the liberals aren’t fighting even against poverty. Fighting poverty is even more unpopular than fighting racism. Ask Adult what he thinks about his taxes going to single mothers.
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
Maybe liberals lose general support by proclaiming to fight against racism and sexism, although people of color and women vote democrat, so I’m not so sure it loses them support. I believe that the liberals have already won the culture war and being vehemently against racism and sexism (even if it’s just in theory) is probably good for their chances of winning going forward. Old white men aren’t getting any younger or healthier either.
Although in reality, the liberals aren’t fighting even against poverty. Fighting poverty is even more unpopular than fighting racism. Ask Adult what he thinks about his taxes going to single mothers.
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
$32 trillion but it would be $38 trillion but that $6 trillion spending bill they were desperate to have failed to pass by Republicans and Joe Manchin who care about America's future.
The $1.7 trillion spending bill that just passed including funding to name a building in DC after Nancy Pelosi. She has many millions and has many rich friends - how come they could not pay for it? How expensive is it to change the name of a building? Instead, we American taxpayers have to pay for it.
The $1.7 trillion spending bill that just passed including funding to name a building in DC after Nancy Pelosi. She has many millions and has many rich friends - how come they could not pay for it? How expensive is it to change the name of a building? Instead, we American taxpayers have to pay for it.
We're paying like $600 million to rename all the Army posts that have confederate general and slave holder names because liberals (none of whom have any idea who any of these men were) are pretended to be offended by them.
I can't imagine spending my life desperate to be offended the way liberals do.
Yes, more poor white people are voting Republican today than previously. It’s a trend that has been occurring since the 1960s and I think a lot of it can be attributed to the increase in racist dog whistling rhetoric used by Republican politicians like Nixon and Reagan that didn’t age very well. I think the Democrats are on the better side of this going forward.
Maybe it's because the IRS last year was going after the poor more than anyone else - including poor whites.
Sally, you really do need to keep your story straight. Is it:
1) IRS should go after poor people? Based on the above, apparently not. Got it.
2) Go after rich people? They certainly didn't seem to worry about Trump. But I'm CERTAIN that you're OK with that. And if they had, well...Deep State!
3) Get rid of all those jackbooted auditors and just have a 100% honor system?
At least #3 would be consistent. And we can pat ourselves on the back for probably being on the way to being Italy, or similar.
Maybe liberals lose general support by proclaiming to fight against racism and sexism, although people of color and women vote democrat, so I’m not so sure it loses them support. I believe that the liberals have already won the culture war and being vehemently against racism and sexism (even if it’s just in theory) is probably good for their chances of winning going forward. Old white men aren’t getting any younger or healthier either.
Although in reality, the liberals aren’t fighting even against poverty. Fighting poverty is even more unpopular than fighting racism. Ask Adult what he thinks about his taxes going to single mothers.
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
Pre-Trump, I would have had a LITTLE sympathy for your first sentence. Since then:
1) When the R presidential candidate EXPLICITLY shows off about grabbing women in the pu*** because you're famous and you can, AND you continue to slavishly support him for 6+ years (and through plenty of other indications of sexism here and there), it's really, really weird that anyone would question whether that party MIGHT be a just teeny bit sexist.
2) When the R party insists on painting 100% of BLM as "riots and looting" without acknowledging that SOME of it just might be about white police officers kneeling the life out of black men.....it's really, really weird that anyone would question whether that party MIGHT be just a teeny bit racist.
Oh, the unfair cross those poor, poor Rs bear......
The $1.7 trillion spending bill that just passed including funding to name a building in DC after Nancy Pelosi. She has many millions and has many rich friends - how come they could not pay for it? How expensive is it to change the name of a building? Instead, we American taxpayers have to pay for it.
We're paying like $600 million to rename all the Army posts that have confederate general and slave holder names because liberals (none of whom have any idea who any of these men were) are pretended to be offended by them.
I can't imagine spending my life desperate to be offended the way liberals do.
Why would one need to have ANY knowledge of individual confederate leaders to not think that we should name bases after them?
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
Pre-Trump, I would have had a LITTLE sympathy for your first sentence. Since then:
1) When the R presidential candidate EXPLICITLY shows off about grabbing women in the pu*** because you're famous and you can, AND you continue to slavishly support him for 6+ years (and through plenty of other indications of sexism here and there), it's really, really weird that anyone would question whether that party MIGHT be a just teeny bit sexist.
2) When the R party insists on painting 100% of BLM as "riots and looting" without acknowledging that SOME of it just might be about white police officers kneeling the life out of black men.....it's really, really weird that anyone would question whether that party MIGHT be just a teeny bit racist.
Oh, the unfair cross those poor, poor Rs bear......
1. He was alone in a bus with another man. It was "locker room talk". It's also 100% true. Gold digging wh*res are a thing whether people pretend otherwise or not. There's nothing sexist about acknowledging a universal truism.
2. BLM was based on a lie. Being upset about a social issue you know nothing about doesn't justify burning down the country.
The only openly racist policies in the US today come from Democrats.
We're paying like $600 million to rename all the Army posts that have confederate general and slave holder names because liberals (none of whom have any idea who any of these men were) are pretended to be offended by them.
I can't imagine spending my life desperate to be offended the way liberals do.
Why would one need to have ANY knowledge of individual confederate leaders to not think that we should name bases after them?
Hint: One wouldn't.
Should it cost $600M (IF it does)? No.
Bear in mind you're speaking as someone who knows absolutely nothing about the Civil War.
Canceling people for stupid reasons is stupid. Spending tens of millions to do it is even dumber.
Maybe liberals lose general support by proclaiming to fight against racism and sexism, although people of color and women vote democrat, so I’m not so sure it loses them support. I believe that the liberals have already won the culture war and being vehemently against racism and sexism (even if it’s just in theory) is probably good for their chances of winning going forward. Old white men aren’t getting any younger or healthier either.
Although in reality, the liberals aren’t fighting even against poverty. Fighting poverty is even more unpopular than fighting racism. Ask Adult what he thinks about his taxes going to single mothers.
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
I don’t think the Republicans are actually racist (sort of, since I think basically everyone is “racist” but not in the way we’re using the word now). I think the Republicans have strategically used dog whistles to gather supporters. I think it’s interesting that Trump didn’t use any African American centric dog whistles. Maybe they didn’t age that well when Nixon and Reagan did it? I don’t think it’s a good strategy long term. When Trump loses in 2024, I think the Republicans will change their approach.
Only morons think the Republicans aren't against racism and sexism. Being anti-white male doesn't make you anti-racist it makes you racist against white males. Swap out "white male" in any Democratic dogma with the minority of your choice and the whole platform sounds like the klan wrote it.
Stealing other people's money and mailing to poor people isn't "fighting poverty". It literally increases poverty. Democrats have driven the country $32 TRILLION into debt by throwing stolen money at the symptoms of problems and they've solved nothing.
I don’t think the Republicans are actually racist (sort of, since I think basically everyone is “racist” but not in the way we’re using the word now). I think the Republicans have strategically used dog whistles to gather supporters. I think it’s interesting that Trump didn’t use any African American centric dog whistles. Maybe they didn’t age that well when Nixon and Reagan did it? I don’t think it’s a good strategy long term. When Trump loses in 2024, I think the Republicans will change their approach.
I think the whole concept of "dog whistles" in politics is absurd.
Republicans aren't anti illegal immigration because they're sneaky racist they're anti illegal immigration for the same reason you personally are anti strangers helping themselves to your bank account and refrigerator.
Republicans say what they believe because they believe it. Democrats say what they think they need to say to manipulate the most people.
I don’t think the Republicans are actually racist (sort of, since I think basically everyone is “racist” but not in the way we’re using the word now). I think the Republicans have strategically used dog whistles to gather supporters. I think it’s interesting that Trump didn’t use any African American centric dog whistles. Maybe they didn’t age that well when Nixon and Reagan did it? I don’t think it’s a good strategy long term. When Trump loses in 2024, I think the Republicans will change their approach.
I think the whole concept of "dog whistles" in politics is absurd.
Republicans aren't anti illegal immigration because they're sneaky racist they're anti illegal immigration for the same reason you personally are anti strangers helping themselves to your bank account and refrigerator.
Republicans say what they believe because they believe it. Democrats say what they think they need to say to manipulate the most people.
Politicians have to deny the use of dog whistles. You definitely have the spirit of a politician Adult. You say the same things every day and with such gumption!
Like I just said, I don’t really think Republican politicians are any more racist than Democrat politicians, but when Trump says “they’re not sending their best”, do you honestly believe he’s not aiming to pull at the racial resentment strings of his white base? No, you’ll say, but that’s because you’re a politician.
Hopefully Mayor Pete can go on another 2-month paternity leave or take another extended vacation to Europe ... he seems to fXck up everything. We are still having supply chain problems 2 years later.
President Biden was briefed on the FAA system outage grounding flights Wednesday, but White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said "no evidence of a cyberattack at this point."
I think the whole concept of "dog whistles" in politics is absurd.
Republicans aren't anti illegal immigration because they're sneaky racist they're anti illegal immigration for the same reason you personally are anti strangers helping themselves to your bank account and refrigerator.
Republicans say what they believe because they believe it. Democrats say what they think they need to say to manipulate the most people.
Politicians have to deny the use of dog whistles. You definitely have the spirit of a politician Adult. You say the same things every day and with such gumption!
Like I just said, I don’t really think Republican politicians are any more racist than Democrat politicians, but when Trump says “they’re not sending their best”, do you honestly believe he’s not aiming to pull at the racial resentment strings of his white base? No, you’ll say, but that’s because you’re a politician.
No he's saying the literal truth that high value people don't flee their country and walk to another one for a better life.
It's not racist to want borders and to be able to choose who gets to come into your country.
It has nothing to do with race. If non-Cuban hispanics voted 80% Republican Democrats would be screaming for a wall and land mines at the border.
Hopefully Mayor Pete can go on another 2-month paternity leave or take another extended vacation to Europe ... he seems to fXck up everything. We are still having supply chain problems 2 years later.
Hopefully Mayor Pete can go on another 2-month paternity leave or take another extended vacation to Europe ... he seems to fXck up everything. We are still having supply chain problems 2 years later.
Who knew that failing at being a small town mayor wasn't a blue print for success at the national level...
why have you rubes locked on to Pete as the only guy in the cabinet you can name or complain about? Honest question.
Mayorkas declares our southern border is secure even though 2.5 million illegally enterered last year. Karine Jean-Pierre is highly competent. Yellen. Blinken is actually okay. Lloyd Austin wants our militry to be feminized. The transgender guy. Agip - name some competent ones in the adminsitration.
this is perfect and we're seeing it again. Because it's all the GOP can do, even after it lost its conservative credentials.
1. campaign on crime, fiscal responsibility, 'family values.'
2. Win elections, gain power
3. Forget promises, cut taxes for the rich, slash the safety net, blow up the deficit.
4. Lose elections, return to step 1.
That is so perfect. the GOP war on the IRS is a pure gift to rich people - the equal of a tax cut. Rich people know they are free to cheat on taxes like Trump has always done. And of course the GOP is saying it will try to cut SS and medicare/medicaid.
You'd think they'd try to do something about crime, amirite? But nah.
Ok. You guys focus on serving rich people. See you in 2024.
