https://jacobinmag.com/2019/10/liberals-...epublicans

Author is kind of nice to most liberal reporters, saying they "miss" things. More blunt would be that they are clueless, narrow-minded bigots who lack critical thinking skills and simply come to the conclusion they already had.

"The effects of Donald Trump’s presidency on the American economy are widely debated, but there’s at least one field of production whose boom is indisputably a result of his election: the conservative voter ethnography industry. Since Trump’s rise, article after article has tracked down Trump voters in some small town in a formerly Democratic state. The pieces vary in tone — some are journalistically objective, others are more personal — but they all seem to end with the author silently shaking their head, confounded by the unbreachable irrationality of these voters...."


"...Income and voting are tightly linked in US politics. Higher income people are more likely to vote, and are more likely to vote Republican, than people with lower incomes. Though the image of the uneducated white Trump voter is omnipresent in American political discourse, the fact that Trump’s support comes disproportionately from the affluent is seldom mentioned...." <doesn't fit the narrative that Republicans are stupid>


"...Others have discovered similar patterns. A study by Cory Maks-Solomon and Elizabeth Rigby examining votes in the Senate found that the two parties are divided on different axes. While Democrats differ between rich and poor on social issues and are united on economics, Republicans are united on social issues and divided on economics, with poor Republicans endorsing significantly more progressive economic policies than rich Republicans. Senators in both parties tended to vote in accordance with the richest members of their party...."

Quote:"The pieces vary in tone — some are journalistically objective, others are more personal — but they all seem to end with the author silently shaking their head, confounded by the unbreachable irrationality of these voters...."

The book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” by Thomas Frank was published in May 2004 and covered all of this ground. The Trump-factor had not (yet) come into play. But really, at an ideological/ demographic level, the debate has not changed at all since then.

Quote:"...While Democrats differ between rich and poor on social issues and are united on economics, Republicans are united on social issues and divided on economics, with poor Republicans endorsing significantly more progressive economic policies than rich Republicans.

That sounds right. But note that the difference between rich and poor Democrats “on social issues” is left undefined. What are these differences?

Quote:Senators in both parties tended to vote in accordance with the richest members of their party...."

We needed a “study” to figure THAT one out?

(10-19-2019 08:22 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:"The pieces vary in tone — some are journalistically objective, others are more personal — but they all seem to end with the author silently shaking their head, confounded by the unbreachable irrationality of these voters...."

The book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” by Thomas Frank was published in May 2004 and covered all of this ground. The Trump-factor had not (yet) come into play. But really, at an ideological/ demographic level, the debate has not changed at all since then.

Quote:"...While Democrats differ between rich and poor on social issues and are united on economics, Republicans are united on social issues and divided on economics, with poor Republicans endorsing significantly more progressive economic policies than rich Republicans.

That sounds right. But note that the difference between rich and poor Democrats “on social issues” is left undefined. What are these differences?

Quote:Senators in both parties tended to vote in accordance with the richest members of their party...."

We needed a “study” to figure THAT one out?

Poor Democrats are more pro-life and less "woke" on LGBalphabet issues.

(10-19-2019 08:22 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:"The pieces vary in tone — some are journalistically objective, others are more personal — but they all seem to end with the author silently shaking their head, confounded by the unbreachable irrationality of these voters...."

The book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” by Thomas Frank was published in May 2004 and covered all of this ground. The Trump-factor had not (yet) come into play. But really, at an ideological/ demographic level, the debate has not changed at all since then.

Hell, nothing has changed since WW2. If you read CS Lewis's Mere Christianity (published 1952), or anything by Milton Friedman (50s and 60s) it's quite clear that they were fighting the exact same battles we are fighting today.

(10-19-2019 08:22 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

Quote:"The pieces vary in tone — some are journalistically objective, others are more personal — but they all seem to end with the author silently shaking their head, confounded by the unbreachable irrationality of these voters...."

The book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” by Thomas Frank was published in May 2004 and covered all of this ground. The Trump-factor had not (yet) come into play. But really, at an ideological/ demographic level, the debate has not changed at all since then.

Quote:"...While Democrats differ between rich and poor on social issues and are united on economics, Republicans are united on social issues and divided on economics, with poor Republicans endorsing significantly more progressive economic policies than rich Republicans.

That sounds right. But note that the difference between rich and poor Democrats “on social issues” is left undefined. What are these differences?

Quote:Senators in both parties tended to vote in accordance with the richest members of their party...."

We needed a “study” to figure THAT one out?

XACLY!