Living Poor, Voting Rich (Kristof NYT) -- Thomas Frank was right!

[Bozita]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/03/opinion/03kris.html

OP-ED COLUMNIST

Living Poor, Voting Rich
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

Published: November 3, 2004



In the aftermath of this civil war that our nation has just fought, one result is clear: the Democratic Party's first priority should be to reconnect with the American heartland.

I'm writing this on tenterhooks on Tuesday, without knowing the election results. But whether John Kerry's supporters are now celebrating or seeking asylum abroad, they should be feeling wretched about the millions of farmers, factory workers and waitresses who ended up voting - utterly against their own interests - for Republican candidates.

One of the Republican Party's major successes over the last few decades has been to persuade many of the working poor to vote for tax breaks for billionaires. Democrats are still effective on bread-and-butter issues like health care, but they come across in much of America as arrogant and out of touch the moment the discussion shifts to values.

"On values, they are really noncompetitive in the heartland," noted Mike Johanns, a Republican who is governor of Nebraska. "This kind of elitist, Eastern approach to the party is just devastating in the Midwest and Western states. It's very difficult for senatorial, Congressional and even local candidates to survive."

more...

[slappypan]

1. What about my values?

Tolerance, freedom of religion, science as a means to free humanity from disease and drudgery, the right to privacy, the basic dignity of all people regardless of race or gender or economic class. Liberal values. Enlightenment values. I won't give them up.

[Briar]

2. What nonsense

Kristof wants democrats to give up values which ultimately derive from Christianity in order to draw in "Christians" whose hatred of gays and love of guns makes them loathe liberals?

Do that and you'll find yourself with a New Democrat party led by an American Tony Blair who is indistinguishable from Bush. It isn't democrats who need to change: it's the born again bigots who need to shed their bigotry and blind faith.

[MISSDem]

3. I think he is right but I don't see how you meld the

issues involved. I mean I do care about the grizzlies and I do care about improving the lives of working people.

[MISSDem]

4. If we don't figure out how to educate people

to the fact that we are not so out there then we will continue losing elections. Do we care? I think people just don't understand. The republicans use fear to scare people into voting for them. Same old same old.

[CitizenRob]

6. Personally

I think most of us on here are probably middle to upper class based on the cost of getting online, and the amount of liesure time need to post on here.

I think if we live in a blue state like California, or NYC, or any of the other economic powerhouse states that voted Democrat we should rejoice about these 'election' results. I hope you all understand that we here in California, and NYC make most of our money off the sweat of the stupid m-fers who live in the bible-tard belt. Let them vote away their right to prosperity, it's going to go back into our pockets.

Do I sound cynical? I am.

Concerned about the religious rights influence on law? Just like in Victorian era England the upper/middle class never had to worry about the strict rules of the time, we won't either. No, those rules will be reserved once again for the stupid m-fers at the bottom that voted for their own exploitation and repression.

Still sound cynical? Yep.

[trekbiker]

7. I'm with you...

Like the midwest and southern Sheeple I too voted against my interests. I voted for Kerry and for a caring and fair democracy, a return to sanity. I voted against Bush and his fascist NeoCon movement.. But as a wealthy person I was "voting against my interests" and concede that I have and will continue to benefit financially under the Bush regime.. the IRONY.. the arguments I've been in with (ex)friends who think their measely $500 or $1000 "tax break" means ANYTHING.. and my tax breaks are 50 times that and their only retort is "well if you're so concerned why dont you give it back???"

And how do I feel now??? I am so dissappointed in America. Fuck the working poor and their idiotic prejudices and fears.. they asked for this?? well.. they deserve it and THEY CAN HAVE IT!!! I will continue to fight for the environment but the rest of the Progressive agenda??? forget it. It's dog eat dog and survival of the smartest.

[CitizenRob]

9. I spent four days in slums

I spent four days in the slums of Reno, going from transient hotel, to transient hotel trying to get people out to vote for their own best interest by voting for Kerry. While I got out a good number of voters, I still found it amazing how many doors I knocked on that were Bush supporters. Well, good for them, I hope they enjoy being starved to death while their children have to quit school to go to work at a fast food joint to support the family.

Life will be GRAND for the top 10% of American's over the next four years. Thankfully I'm one of them.

[CitizenRob]

5. LiberalTimes: Time Off...

Hi everybody,

What we have seen happen in the past 24 hours is beyond belief. America's middle and lower classes have basically signed away their right to prosperity, and signed on to being exploited by the wealthy.

I worked very hard over the past four days in Nevada in the hopes that I could turn that state blue for John Kerry. In the end though it wasn't enough. The decision came down to Ohio, the state that Diebold computer voting systems is manufactured in. No paper trail, and wildly different exit polling results (the exit polling said Kerry won.)

Is it a dictatorship even when nobody knows it?

I'm going to take a break now. America is broken, and will be for at least four more years. I hope the middle and lower classes enjoy their exploitation at the hands of the wealthy Republicans: you have earned it.

CitizenRob

[BJ]

8. I disagree with Kristof on one point.

To appeal to middle America, Democratic leaders don't need to carry guns to church services and shoot grizzlies on the way. But a starting point would be to shed their inhibitions about talking about faith, and to work more with religious groups.

The Reverend Jesse Jackson isn't part of a religious group? And there are many religions oriented organizations on the left that I care to count.

No, Democratic politicians need to talk straight to the public. And by that I mean if it comes down to telling the working-middle class that voting for Repiglicans is stupid then that's what needs be done.

I remember, somewhere, seeing an old news reel of Harry Truman on his Whistle-stop Campaign against Thomas Dewey saying something like: "Any farmer who votes for these reactionary Republicans ought to have his head examined."

I think it's time to tell working-middle class America it needs its head examined if it continues voting Repiglican.

Religion's not the answer, it's the problem.

[MissMarple]

10. How do we educate people about liberal values? We have to find away.

"The Republicans are smarter," mused Oregon's governor, Ted Kulongoski, a Democrat. "They've created ... these social issues to get the public to stop looking at what's happening to them economically."

"What we once thought - that people would vote in their economic self-interest - is not true, and we Democrats haven't figured out how to deal with that."

He's right, Republicans have used their resources and wealth to convince people to vote against their own ability to prosper. They have tapped into a way these folks think and have used that against them. There will always be religious types who will never understand what we are all about, but I don't believe that is a majority of the people who voted for this administration. I do think we need to take the values and morality debate back from the radicals and the neocons and do so in a way that most folks can understand. The Oregon governor is right, but we do need to figure out to do this. Economic issues and moral issues go hand in hand.

[CitizenRob]

11. Is this a bad thing?

I mean we are talking about the people who are darn near re-bible-tarded. Let's just let them cling to their religion while the rest of us cling to the huge bank account summaries we can generate off the backs of the Republi-tard majority in the low-income southern states. They'll produce our goods for just above the cost of a third world nation, and we'll sell them in our safely Democratic state at high mark ups (laughing all the way to the bank.)

[MissMarple]

12. I don't think all of them are really that religious.

And yes it's a bad thing.

But religion does color their way of speaking and the way they look at the world. I also think that liberals have been portrayed as the bad guys for so long that whatever we do now will simply not be accepted. They just don't get us. Unless we can get around that shell they have thrown up to protect themselves from what they don't understand, that will not change.

An exploiting them for personal gain is in the long run counterproductive. It is in the best interests of America to promote the general good, it makes us all more secure.

[mediaman007]

13. Hell, we can join them and take over on the inside.

They'll follow anyone who will spout the party line. Just praise their god, and buy a gun, join the NRA and your in. Next, go to party meetings. They would have to be happy to have anyone that is literate representing them.

When we get in office we can do liberal things and claim that God spoke to us.

[DinahMoeHum]

15. What goods, Citizen Rob? Just what ARE our industries, now?

The good stuff is getting outsourced to the cheaper, more educated countries, like India and China.

I've had a vision of seeing a billboard with the Stars and Stripes, and it reads "American Tits And Ass Are Our No. 1 World Export"

Sorry to be so glum.

:evilfrown:

[MrTriumph]

14. HOT button issue for opponents

"As for gays, that's a rare wedge issue that Democrats have managed to neutralize in part, along with abortion. Most Americans disapprove of gay marriage but do support some kind of civil unions...."

He incorrectly characterizes the issue about gays. IMHO, those who may be more tolerant are, well, more tolerant, but not necessarily strongly so. Opponents, driven by fear, are very adamant.

There is not a balance on this issue.