Election irony

[dejr_8]

I see the same thing with a lot of women especially that only vote democrat because of the abortion issue. Frankly, one issue voters drive me crazy, but I understand everyone has their hot button issue.

Most republicans I know, middle-class or poor (because I don't really know any RICH people), vote that way because they want to take care of themselves, and don't want the government doing it. And, yes, the gun issue is big too.
Myself, I mostly vote republican, but I'm actually more Libertarian at heart.

You posted it before I could. This is the fundamental difference in approaches between the Dems and Reps. It is the mommy approach (let mommy kiss that cut for you and it will be all better) versus the daddy approach (see I told you it has sharp, now don't touch it again).

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

Well, that's the thing. I'm one of the less-wealthy McCain supporters, and I don't want anything from anyone else. I just want what I earn. And yes, abortion was a top issue for me.

I'm not a wealthy democrat, but I didn't vote for Obama because I wanted something for nothing! To me, that's not what his tax plans are about at all!

From the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center as quoted from the Washington Post:

"The McCain tax plan would make the tax system more regressive.... It would do so by providing relatively little tax relief to those at the bottom of the income scale while providing huge tax cuts to households at the very top of the income distribution."

An analysis of both campaigns proposals by the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that for people with incomes between $66,354 and $111,645, Obama's proposals would cut their taxes by more than $1000, compared to around $300 under McCain's plan.

This isn't about wanting something for nothing. This is giving the biggest tax cuts to crooked CEOs while heavying the tax burden on our teachers, our factory workers, our Joe Sixpacks. In essence, McCain's tax proposals would have caused more people to seek out goverment asistance as their take home pay dwindled...

 

[LakeAriel]

Many poorer Republicans and their communities were inundated with propaganda that Obama would tax them more if they made more then $42,000..
Unfortunately they fell for it all, he was a socialist, a Muslim, possibly a terrorist, and would take their guns, their earnings, their Bible. I have a home in NEPA and trust me this is sadly true. There are backward people in different parts of the country and racism is rampant in some areas. There is a reason Murtha was re-elected , he was right. PA may have stayed blue but there are areas that are blood red. ( Like many states)

 

[Crankyshank]

My state is pretty damn poor and Obama received 64% of the vote

 

[LuvDuke]

Case in point: Joe the plumber. Go figure.

 

[Geoff_M]

I'm not a wealthy democrat, but I didn't vote for Obama because I wanted something for nothing! To me, that's not what his tax plans are about at all!

From the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center as quoted from the Washington Post:

"The McCain tax plan would make the tax system more regressive.... It would do so by providing relatively little tax relief to those at the bottom of the income scale while providing huge tax cuts to households at the very top of the income distribution."

An analysis of both campaigns proposals by the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that for people with incomes between $66,354 and $111,645, Obama's proposals would cut their taxes by more than $1000, compared to around $300 under McCain's plan.

This isn't about wanting something for nothing. This is giving the biggest tax cuts to crooked CEOs while heavying the tax burden on our teachers, our factory workers, our Joe Sixpacks. In essence, McCain's tax proposals would have caused more people to seek out goverment asistance as their take home pay dwindled...

You do realize that after the elections, all "plans" are null and void, subject to change without notice, and are frequently forgotten that they existed in the first place... right? Harry and Nan will get to write the actual legislation... with input from Obama.

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

You do realize that after the elections, all "plans" are null and void, subject to change without notice, and are frequently forgotten that they existed in the first place... right? Harry and Nan will get to write the actual legislation... with input from Obama.

Well, that doesn't answer anything. Thanks.

 

[Geoff_M]

Well, that doesn't answer anything. Thanks.

Right... Arguing about the details of this "plan" or that "plan" after an election is a meaningless exercise.

 

[denisenh]

Well, that's the thing. I'm one of the less-wealthy McCain supporters, and I don't want anything from anyone else. I just want what I earn. And yes, abortion was a top issue for me.

i feel like that too...kind of. i don't want anything from anyone either but i am willing to share what little i have with someone that may need it more than i do. oh, and i am a democrat and i didn't support mccain or either bush.

see we DO have some thing in common!

 

[Golf4food]

Nothing new under the sun. Go back through history and you will find the following truth about America:

The industrial centers are liberal, the less-industrialized countryside is conservative. Regardless of the name attached to the parties (Democrat, Republican, Whig, Federalist, etc.) it has pretty much always been the same.

Look at a county level map to see the real truth behind major elections. The northeast and the heavily populated cities in the south and west vote blue, everything esle mostly votes red. The same sort of division existed before the Civil War. The issues today are not slavery and trade tarrifs on cotton, etc. but they are just as devisive. The only areas in the South that had a majority for Obama are the biggest cities (generally a large number of "outsiders" who have moved there for jobs over the years), South Florida (which is just a retirement village for New Yorkers and a safe haven for hispanic minorities escaping other countries), liberal college towns (like Gainesville, FL), and locations where blacks are large percentage of the population (95% of whom voted for Obama based on exit polls cited by CNN.com).

That leaves the rural countryside where many or most of the people have been living in that area for generations (or in other rural areas like it) and have a long standing tradition of believing in the concept of individual rights, owning guns, earn what you work for without hand-outs, higher percentage of religious persons, etc. All of those things go against a liberal agenda that might seem to many to offer hand-outs for no work, limit gun rights, be anti-religion, etc.

You can offer "free" money to those people all you want - most of them would turn their noses up at you and be insulted. I grew up around those people. Much of my family are those people. Part of me still is and always
will be.

In the end, though, I still think most Americans are more centrist than the media (or maybe even ourselves) want us to believe. Take away the really devisive issues like abortion or gay marriage (and for most I think it is only the word "marriage" that is at issue, not allowing civil unions or the same rights), and most of the remaining stuff is probably not all that different. I think we are all willing to fight to defend our country when necessary and would all prefer to not need to fight at all. I think most of us are willing to offer help to the poorest and neediest that truly need help. I think most people would agree that providing at least basic health care for those who absolutely cannot do so for themselves is a good thing. I think we'd all like to make more money and pay fewer taxes whenever possible. I think most of us just want to be left alone to live our lives with our friends and families as best we can.

I will exit my soapbox with a quote from the movie "Enemy at the Gates":

Danilov: "I've been such a fool, Vassili. Man will always be a man. There is no new man. We tried so hard to create a society that was equal, where there'd be nothing to envy your neighbour. But there's always something to envy. A smile, a friendship, something you don't have and want to appropriate. In this world, even a Soviet one, there will always be rich and poor. Rich in gifts, poor in gifts. Rich in love, poor in love."

 

[Pugsley]

Apologies in advance to all the people who will be VERY offended by this (including my husband the Republican). But in general, if one were to get statistics on the average education levels in the blue states versus the red states, what do you think they would find? No, I’m not trying to call Republicans stupid – I know lots of very intelligent ones and I agree with many of their principles myself. But am I wrong to think that, in general, people who are a little more educated and well-traveled may be more accepting of people who are different than themselves (maybe just because they’ve been exposed to more things, people, places?) That they might have more compassion for the poor, for homosexuals, for people of religions other than their own, for women who wish to decide for themselves whether or not to go through a pregnancy.

It was funny when Luke Russert (Tim’s son) made a major faux pas a couple of months ago for which he ended up having to apologize. He was visiting the University of Virginia to interview students about their thoughts on the election. He was asked which candidate was more popular there and he said something like, “well, this is where some of the smartest kids in the country go, so of course they’re for Obama.”

Go ahead – tear me apart! My husband even gets angry with me when I say things like this, but c’mon, isn’t there an itty bitty chance that there is some truth to it?

 

[castleview]

I've lived in a lot of places and have discovered that people are ignorant everywhere. Yeah, you have people in small towns that fit the stereotypes that many of you were talking about. But I've met just as many people in the city who think small town Midwesterners are uncultured, innocent people who have never had any "real" challenges or drama in their lives or have never met a minority or a gay person. That's a crock.

I've met liberals who talk about helping the poor, but never work at a soup kitchen or food bank. I've met conservatives who don't want to pay any more in taxes yet are extremely generous people. I've worked for the liberal New York Times which kept their fresh out of college employees on temp service for little pay and no benefits and I've worked for small business that gave me compensation because I was on my DH's insurance and didn't need their plan.

I've also found that people who are poor or lower middle class have pride and don't want government handouts. I've seen college students remain liberal until they see their first pay stub. I've also seen doctors who are well educated state that a women's health has nothing to do with late term abortions. And this past election I saw four candidates who were ALL against gay marriage - even the Democrats.

Irony is everywhere! Yes, education is an anecdote to close mindedness. But those of us who are well educated tend to close our own minds too.

 

[Scurvy]

Apologies in advance to all the people who will be VERY offended by this (including my husband the Republican). But in general, if one were to get statistics on the average education levels in the blue states versus the red states, what do you think they would find? No, I’m not trying to call Republicans stupid – I know lots of very intelligent ones and I agree with many of their principles myself. But am I wrong to think that, in general, people who are a little more educated and well-traveled may be more accepting of people who are different than themselves (maybe just because they’ve been exposed to more things, people, places?) That they might have more compassion for the poor, for homosexuals, for people of religions other than their own, for women who wish to decide for themselves whether or not to go through a pregnancy.
It was funny when Luke Russert (Tim’s son) made a major faux pas a couple of months ago for which he ended up having to apologize. He was visiting the University of Virginia to interview students about their thoughts on the election. He was asked which candidate was more popular there and he said something like, “well, this is where some of the smartest kids in the country go, so of course they’re for Obama.”

Go ahead – tear me apart! My husband even gets angry with me when I say things like this, but c’mon, isn’t there an itty bitty chance that there is some truth to it?

I don't disagree with your bolded statement. I don't see what that has to do with the Republican/Democrat issue, though. The city in which I live has a higher than average number of people with advanced degrees and other post-graduate education. We also have a very large international population, most of whom have become citizens. This city voted overwhelmingly in favor of McCain. It really had nothing to do with education or lack thereof.

For some people the choice was based on their religious beliefs, for others it was based on other concerns about the economy, the military, and other issues. Using your example of abortion - one can certainly have compassion for someone facing an unplanned pregnancy without supporting the decision to terminate the pregnancy. One can have compassion for the poor and wish to help them but disagree that Senator Obama's plan is the best way to go about it.

People have different beliefs and different priorities that determine the way that they vote. Your statement seems to suggest that in general only those who lack education would vote Republican. It seems a bit egotistical - as though anyone who would disagree with you must be uneducated. Surely you don't really think that!

 

[BellvilleDad]

i feel like that too...kind of. i don't want anything from anyone either but i am willing to share what little i have with someone that may need it more than i do. oh, and i am a democrat and i didn't support mccain or either bush.

see we DO have some thing in common!

Great point! If we look hard enough, we can usually find common interests.

Like you, I don't mind helping those that need it. I just want the to make sure that those that need help are trying to help themselves.

 

[ZachnElli]

Apologies in advance to all the people who will be VERY offended by this (including my husband the Republican). But in general, if one were to get statistics on the average education levels in the blue states versus the red states, what do you think they would find? No, I’m not trying to call Republicans stupid – I know lots of very intelligent ones and I agree with many of their principles myself. But am I wrong to think that, in general, people who are a little more educated and well-traveled may be more accepting of people who are different than themselves (maybe just because they’ve been exposed to more things, people, places?) That they might have more compassion for the poor, for homosexuals, for people of religions other than their own, for women who wish to decide for themselves whether or not to go through a pregnancy.
It was funny when Luke Russert (Tim’s son) made a major faux pas a couple of months ago for which he ended up having to apologize. He was visiting the University of Virginia to interview students about their thoughts on the election. He was asked which candidate was more popular there and he said something like, “well, this is where some of the smartest kids in the country go, so of course they’re for Obama.”

Go ahead – tear me apart! My husband even gets angry with me when I say things like this, but c’mon, isn’t there an itty bitty chance that there is some truth to it?

But in bigger cities you have large populations of the inner-city people who are lucky to have a high school education or a GED and they vote Democratic. And those inner-cities have very large popluations versus the small towns you are comparing to.

 

[friendofgusgus]

I've lived in a lot of places and have discovered that people are ignorant everywhere. Yeah, you have people in small towns that fit the stereotypes that many of you were talking about. But I've met just as many people in the city who think small town Midwesterners are uncultured, innocent people who have never had any "real" challenges or drama in their lives or have never met a minority or a gay person. That's a crock.

I've met liberals who talk about helping the poor, but never work at a soup kitchen or food bank. I've met conservatives who don't want to pay any more in taxes yet are extremely generous people. I've worked for the liberal New York Times which kept their fresh out of college employees on temp service for little pay and no benefits and I've worked for small business that gave me compensation because I was on my DH's insurance and didn't need their plan.

I've also found that people who are poor or lower middle class have pride and don't want government handouts. I've seen college students remain liberal until they see their first pay stub. I've also seen doctors who are well educated state that a women's health has nothing to do with late term abortions. And this past election I saw four candidates who were ALL against gay marriage - even the Democrats.

Irony is everywhere! Yes, education is an anecdote to close mindedness. But those of us who are well educated tend to close our own minds too.

Thank you for this post.

 

[Pugsley]

For some people the choice was based on their religious beliefs, for others it was based on other concerns about the economy, the military, and other issues. Using your example of abortion - one can certainly have compassion for someone facing an unplanned pregnancy without supporting the decision to terminate the pregnancy. One can have compassion for the poor and wish
People have different beliefs and different priorities that determine the way that they vote. Your statement seems to suggest that in general only those who lack education would vote Republican. It seems a bit egotistical - as though anyone who would disagree with you must be uneducated. Surely you don't really think that!

You make some good points and, no, I certainly don’t believe that only people who lack education vote Republican. As I said early in my post, I believe in many of the things the Republicans believe in. I respect anyone who voted for McCain based on real issues. But, yes, there is a certain contingent I would call uneducated. Those are the people who voted based on the color of someone’s skin, or fell for the scare tactics like he’s Muslim, he hangs out with terrorists, he’s not a U.S. citizen, etc. etc. Although I guess that’s not even fair because there were also plenty of people who voted for Obama for what I would call the wrong reasons.

 

[What the Heck]

Enlighten us then. Since we are talking about the poorer Republican voters, what did McCain offer on his plate for them that would be better than Obama's plans for the less wealthy?

To quote our VP elect, it's a simple 3 letter word - JOBS.

(Great, we got the Dan Quale of the Democratic Party for VP - should be a fun 4 years with Gaffeomatic Joe).

 

[Scurvy]

But, yes, there is a certain contingent I would call uneducated. Those are the people who voted based on the color of someone’s skin, or fell for the scare tactics like he’s Muslim, he hangs out with terrorists, he’s not a U.S. citizen, etc. etc. Although I guess that’s not even fair because there were also plenty of people who voted for Obama for what I would call the wrong reasons.

I can definately agree with you there! There were people on both sides that voted based on things that are superficial (the race thing) or are misconceptions (the Muslim thing, McCain being at death's door). I don't think that's the norm for either party, though.

I think that sort of thing happens often - I know that in our local elections, some people were voting "yes" (or no) on everything without reading any of it. That's a terrible way to vote! Some people have told me in the past that they chose which name to mark based on which name "sounded nicer". People use all sorts of ridiculous reasons to choose their candidate, sadly - I wish there was a way to discourage that, but I guess if someone wants to waste their vote that way there really isn't anything we can do about it.

 

[Pugsley]

But in bigger cities you have large populations of the inner-city people who are lucky to have a high school education or a GED and they vote Democratic. And those inner-cities have very large popluations versus the small towns you are comparing to.

Very true. It is hard to make generalizations since there’s such a wide spectrum of people in all states. Where I live is a good example. Washington DC itself has a good deal of poverty. It is always blue. Just outside of DC are some of the richest and most educated counties in the country (this includes Northern Virginia) – always blue. The rest of Virginia (much more rural/southern) – always red. Two groups of people can vote for the same party for very different reasons.