LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

This is the real difference between the Dems and the Pubs now

P

pecksniff

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 4, 2021
Posts
22,077
It is the class composition of the parties.

Ignore maps that show electoral results by state and look at county maps or maps of U.S. House districts. At this level of granularity, state borders disappear. There are no red states or blue states. Instead, there are blue urban cores floating in a sea of red. Even the exurbs and rural areas in blue states like California and New York tend to be overwhelmingly red and Republican.
This is not a difference between “city” and “country.” Hardly any Americans live or work on farms or ranches anymore. The big divide is within metro areas, between the blue downtowns and their inner-ring suburbs that are home to the American oligarchy and its children and retainers, and the red exurbs; outer-ring suburbs tend to be battlegrounds between the Democratic and Republican coalitions. This geographic concentration hurts the Democrats in the Senate and the Electoral College. At the same time, Democratic blue core cities in majority red states can often circumvent state governments by appealing directly to Congress and to the enforcement layers of the federal bureaucracy and judiciary, as well as to the media and corporate elites controlled by the national party.

The Democratic coalition is an hourglass, top-heavy and bottom-heavy with a narrow middle. In addition to hoovering up the votes of college-educated Americans, the Democrats are the party of the Big Rich—tech billionaires and CEOs, investment banking houses, and the managerial class that spans large corporate enterprises and aligned prestige federal agencies like the Justice Department and the national security agencies. This mostly white and Asian American group cannot win elections without the overwhelming support of Black Americans, and smaller majorities of Hispanic and Asian American voters, clustered in the downtowns and inner suburbs. The high cost of living in Democratic hub cities forces out the multiracial middle; the exceptions tend to be civil servants like police and first responders and teachers who can (sometimes) afford to live in or near their downtown jobs.
The social base of the Democrats is neither a few liberal billionaires nor the more numerous cohorts of high-school educated minority voters; it is the disproportionately white college-educated professionals and managers. These affluent but not rich overclass households dominate the Democratic Party and largely determine its messaging, not by virtue of campaign contributions or voting numbers, but because they very nearly monopolize the staffing of the institutions that support the party—K-12 schools and universities, city and state and federal bureaucracies, public sector unions, foundations, foundation-funded nonprofit organizations, and the mass media. By osmosis, professional and managerial values and material interests and fads and fashions permeate the Democratic Party and shape its agenda.
While the liberal Big Rich cluster in silver apartments and offices in trophy skyscrapers in the inner core of blue cities, the elites of the outer suburbs and exurbs tend to be made up of the Lesser Rich—millionaire car dealership owners, real estate agents, oil and gas drilling equipment company owners, and hair salon chain owners. This group of proprietors—the petty bourgeoisie, to use Marxist terminology, compared to the Democratic haute bourgeoisie and its professional allies—forms the social base of the Republican Party, despite efforts by Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Marco Rubio of Florida, and others to rebrand the GOP as a working-class party.
Which is not to say that the social differences between the two parties aren’t important. There are far more business owners and fewer managers of huge multinational firms or banks in red areas than there are in the class-stratified, hierarchical Democratic urban cores. There are fewer rich and fewer poor. If the social structure of Democratic cores resembles an hourglass, the shape of the Republican exurbs and rural areas looks more like a diamond.
Click to expand...
 
That's not new.

The (D)'eez have been hostile to the middle class since forever.

You guys want your small group of elites and a bunch of broken poor people dependent on them.

Just look at the states the govern. That didn't happen over night.
 
If a liberal Justice had done what Thomas did, there would be an armed mob wheeling a gallows up to the Supreme Court building.
 
Sanity? Logic? Reasoning? These were lost to Republicans in late 2007. It's been scorched earth since then.
 
Trump got as far as he did by convincing the bulging middle of the GOP "diamond," the (white) middle and working classes, that here at last was somebody who spoke for them.

But he never did do anything that made their lives any better. He only benefited those at the apex of the diamond (and at the top bulge of the Democrat hourglass).
 
In fact, there really is no party in American politics right now that is looking out for the interests of the working class, defining the latter as blue-collar workers with no higher education and their families. The Dems should be, that's their history, but in their present formation they're more concerned with the rich and the poor and POC.
 
phrodeau said:
If a liberal Justice had done what Thomas did, there would be an armed mob wheeling a gallows up to the Supreme Court building.
Click to expand...
Heck, the liberal justice wouldn't even have to actually do it. It'd be enough for Fox News to say she had done it.
 
Gorgoroth said:
That's not new.

The (D)'eez have been hostile to the middle class since forever.

You guys want your small group of elites and a bunch of broken poor people dependent on them.
Click to expand...
That's not how it was in the New Deal and Great Society days.
 
pecksniff said:
That's not how it was in the New Deal and Great Society days.
Click to expand...
The New Deal was back when Democrats were still liberal...almost 90 years ago now.

Great society was socialist trash and arguably the start of the Democrats war of elitism upon the working and middle class.
 
Gorgoroth said:
The New Deal was back when Democrats were still liberal...almost 90 years ago now.

Great society was socialist trash and arguably the start of the Democrats war of elitism upon the working and middle class.
Click to expand...
Socialism and elitism ain't exactly compatible.
 
Gorgoroth said:
The New Deal was back when Democrats were still liberal...almost 90 years ago now.

Great society was socialist trash and arguably the start of the Democrats war of elitism upon the working and middle class.
Click to expand...
The New Deal turned unemployed whites into a stable working class of hard working, law abiding, tax paying people who got married before having children. The Great Society tried to do that with poor blacks. Instead it created an underclass of welfare recipients who have illegitimate children, and who often supplement their welfare checks with the gains from criminal activities. During the late 1960's there was even a welfare rights movement that encouraged low income blacks to quit their jobs and go on welfare.
 
pecksniff said:
What matters more is where they direct their campaign funding.
Click to expand...
Does the richest one percent of the country donate more money to the Democrat Party than the Republican Party? This is an honest question. I do not know the answer.
 
The_Trouvere said:
Does the richest one percent of the country donate more money to the Democrat Party than the Republican Party? This is an honest question. I do not know the answer.
Click to expand...
Democratic Party, unless you want to sound like Joe McCarthy.
 
pecksniff said:
In fact, there really is no party in American politics right now that is looking out for the interests of the working class, defining the latter as blue-collar workers with no higher education and their families. The Dems should be, that's their history, but in their present formation they're more concerned with the rich and the poor and POC.
Click to expand...
This is Peck projecting his lack of knowledge onto everyone else.
 
phrodeau said:
If a liberal Justice had done what Thomas did, there would be an armed mob wheeling a gallows up to the Supreme Court building.
Click to expand...
Actually, a number of liberal justices have been confirmed to the Supreme Court since the Thomas confirmation.
 
BabyBoomer50s said:
Neither did Thomas but he did have a bat shit crazy stalker.
Click to expand...
He had at least three accusers, actually. I have no doubt you're convinced they were all part of some sort of conspiracy, but Occam's razor says the accusations were probably true. So, for that matter, did numerous of Thomas' black friends. Tellingly, his white friends had only ever seen him be a gentleman, which explains a lot.
 
YDB95 said:
He had at least three accusers, actually. I have no doubt you're convinced they were all part of some sort of conspiracy, but Occam's razor says the accusations were probably true. So, for that matter, did numerous of Thomas' black friends. Tellingly, his white friends had only ever seen him be a gentleman, which explains a lot.
Click to expand...
No conspiracy. Hill discredited herself and Thomas was confirmed. Racists such as you have been having difficulty accepting that ever since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
American history periodized by party systems -- what comes next?
Replies
5
Views
101
Politruk
P
RoryN
Musk calls MAGAts like the PB Deplorables "contemptible fools" and "racists"
Replies
9
Views
205
MajorRewrite
M
P
How can a civil war even happen?
2 3 4
Replies
87
Views
1K
Politruk
P
P
The proper distribution of powers and functions between the White House and Congress
Replies
7
Views
108
Politruk
P
Rightguide
The Real President Threatens To Take Back The Panama Canal
7 8 9
Replies
201
Views
2K
Rotadom
Rotadom
Back
Top