(link? or do you recall where you saw it? not doubting you, just want to see it myself.)
There’s such a huge amount of overlap in those groups (to the point where one could say something about a Libertarians, Evangelicals, Tea Party Establishment candidate at this point and it just about makes sense), it’s hilarious to pretend they represent a real diversity of ideology in the Republican party. People have adopted the various positions - even the contradictory ones - at the same time. They had 17 primary candidates with very little difference on most of the issues. All some flavor of fundamentalist Christian, all anti-abortion, all low taxes on the rich, all free trade (and pro-corporatist), etc. And there’s a difference between campaigning as an authoritarian and turning autocratic once in office - at the very least, in the latter case, the people who supported the candidate could suddenly stop.
4 Likes
It was on one of the PBS news programs. I tuned in just in time to get that interview and switched over after.
The conditions leading to their flight must have occurred post 2011.
Let’s remember though that there are SOME jerbs that need to be protected.
Lose your coding job to an Indian H-!B? Solidarity, fellow proletarian!!
Lose your roofing job to a Guatemalan border crosser? Fuck you, bigot.
It gets really funny around hour 9
1 Like
As someone who is voting for Giant Asteroid or Gamma Ray Burst (undecided as of yet), I find your “Vote for Hillary or be Nuked” false dichotomy adorable.
That’s not even scary.
3 Likes
Is that true? In Texas at least, it’s support the entire platform or get booted.
True to some degree. But there’s been one party that has been oh so very pro corporation. I’ll give you that both are bad, but the other at least pays lip service to fighting inequity. Can you imagine Elizabeth Warren being tolerated in the republican party?
Socially there is, but not fiscally. There are pro-choice Republicans but probably not any pro-life Democrats left. The drug war and gay rights are other issues that Republicans differ on.
Except if you want to actually run as a Republican, you can’t nominally be pro-choice. They’re doing their best to squash diversity.
Edit: wrong word choice originally
4 Likes
One of the reasons I never used to vote in Louisiana was that the local Dems would usually also run pro-life campaigns, and go on at length about family values.
3 Likes
There was no exit polling at my GOP primary. None. Not any at all.
There wasn’t any at mine, either.
Amazingly, these organizations don’t have the funding or staff to be outside every single polling station. They have to pick a representative subset to do their testing. That’s how these things work.
1 Like
Some would say “that’s how these things don’t work”. 
Looking at the actual 42 page Rothwell paper, I see that a lot of math was required to obtain the particular factoid people are repeating. Lots of “correcting” and “adjusting” of raw data - for example, if the raw numbers say white non-hispanics voting GOP tend to earn less than those not voting GOP (and that, apparently, is what the numbers say) those numbers are adjusted for the urban cost of living to push the rural numbers up. But I need to study it more, I guess.
Here’s a few interesting direct quotes:
On the other hand, workers in blue collar occupations (defined as production, construction, installation, maintenance, and repair, or transportation) are far more likely to support Trump, as are those with less education. People with graduate degrees are particularly unlikely to view Trump favorably. Since blue collar and less educated workers have faced greater economic distress in recent years, this provides some evidence that economic hardship and lower socio-economic status boost Trump’s popularity.
two alternative measures of living standards — health and intergenerational mobility — provide support for the idea that Trump supporters are less prosperous than others, or at least live in less thriving communities
It’s a complex and interesting paper, from what I can see just skimming it. I imagine there’s enough in it to challenge everyone’s beliefs in some way.
Based on the people I’ve known, those in the building trades have, on average, made more annual income than the ones with graduate degrees…including some doctors I know.
Don’t assume blue collar means ‘poor’ and “highly educated” means ‘wealthy’. It’s more about WHERE the person lives and the job opportunities within range than the job classification itself.
6 Likes
That’s a really good point! Where I live, nearly all the building trades pay poorly, and the people in them have disproportionately high rates of alcoholism and disproportionately low levels of education. Exceptions abound, unsurprisingly, but overall the state of the trades is appalling around here. That’s one of several reasons I generally do all of my own masonry, plumbing, carpentry, mechanical and electrical work. The few tradesmen around here who won’t arrive drunk on the job are unlikely to return calls because they have more business than they can handle.
I have to remember not to generalize based on my local experiences…
3 Likes
Yeah, that is just not the reality around here, and by here I’m including a significant percentage of several states, from major city to 100% rural. (In other words, local to me and people I know well.) In fact, I’m sort of horrified to hear that’s true anywhere. 
1 Like
It is horrifying. One of my best friends is a handyman, and he loves his job. He’s very highly rated by his customers on the online forums like Angie’s List &etc.
He says “if someone calls me, I call them back. That sets me above 85% of my competition. When I say I will be somewhere I show up on time, or I call well in advance to say I won’t be there. That puts me ahead of another five percent. And I don’t show up drunk or high, so that’s another five percent. So before I even start the job, I’m giving my customers a better experience than 95% of my competition.”
This applies to the area between Philadelphia and Baltimore - so portions of four states. Mike Rowe says it extends further, and that it’s spreading - in the USA we are losing skilled laborers faster than we are replacing them, because skilled tradesmen are seen as a lower social class, and treated as one, and thus smart and capable people are no longer entering the trades in sufficient numbers.
7 Likes
I’ve long been interested in Rowe’s views on working class labor. Thanks for posting that.
3 Likes
