2w ago

Is Racism & Bigotry still the biggest factor in Presidential Elections?

Just gonna keep this short and to the point.

We all know FDR only went so far with including black people in new deal programs to appease the southern coalition of Dems. He also denied entry for Jewish Refugees and deported many Mexicans during the Great Depression.

Once LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act, Dems essentially lost the South forever.

Nixon pulled federal funding from affordable public housing in black neighborhoods and it strengthened his base.

Reagan blamed the aids epidemic on gay people and was embraced by the country.

Obama had to run on being anti-gay marriage in 08, but ran on being pro-gay marriage in 2012 and lost some support.

Trump spent millions in anti-trans ads. And leaned into the trans panic.

I know social issues aren’t everything, but it seems like that’s the direction America has gone post Civil Rights.

You're viewing a single thread.

25 comments

Racism and bigotry are the main factor in motivating the conservative base.
Promoting hope and progressive change would be the motivating factor for Dems, but they are also conservative and rug pull most candidates that try to push for progressive change. They let Obama slip through, and there are a few like AOC that don't get squashed, but the party leadership is all about appeasing the 'moderates' while trying and failing to peel away Republican voters.
So racism and bigotry are the biggest factors because they are both used and effective in consistently winning elections.
Edit: Obama didn't lose support for switching to gay marriage. He lost support because people blamed him for not overcoming Republican obstruction.
- I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I think we oversubscribe conservative motivation as being racism and bigotry. I think it's a major part for SOME, but across the entire population of people who voted Republican it's AT LEAST not the primary motivating factor.
  It's a narrow but important distinction, that I think it's tone.
  If you look at the acceleration of wealth accumulation, especially since about 1970 where productivity and wages began to diverge, this has generated significant angst in a lot of people. Where in history you could have a car a house and two kids on a single income, now it's a complete fantasy. Look at how the Simpsons has aged, it's laughably inconceivable now, but it wasn't at the inception of the show.
  People have a lot of trouble coming to terms with specifically WHY this has happened, why the "good life" has slipped from our grasp. People are mad, sad... Generally anxious, frustrated... Things, in their mind, are NOT OK. And they're right.
  Republicans MEET that tone. Will their policies help at all? No. But they MEET THE TONE. It sounds, when they speak, that they FEEL the way the electorate FEELS.
  There is no substance.
  So, anyways, I think for most people who voted R, bigotry is something they're willing to accept if the promise is it will result in a better life, but I don't think it's what they crave.
  I think just writing it all off as bigotry and racism is convenient, but it's counter-productive. It's a thought terminating statement. It lends no opportunity for the Democratic party to self reflect on what Rs had that they didn't.
  They didn't have the protective-angry-dad energy that they crave. The substance of the platform is immaterial to people driven and attracted by emotion. I think MANY people would have voted for a democrat with a non-bigorty platform if they just brought protective-angry-dad vibes.
  
  So, anyways, I think for most people who voted R, bigotry is something they’re willing to accept if the promise is it will result in a better life, but I don’t think it’s what they crave.
  I think just writing it all off as bigotry and racism is convenient, but it’s counter-productive.
  No, just no.
  Republicans blame immigrants and 'DEI hires' as the thing to blame for their voting block's economic woes. Their voters buy that shit up like an all you can eat buffet. They are not 'willing to accept' bigotry and racism, they are justifying their bigotry and racism by letting Republicans blame the people they already hate for their economic woes.
  Dems fail because they don't sell their wins and are wet noodles when opposing rising fascism, so people aren't motivated enough to overcome Republican voter suppression. They would absolutely support someone with angry dad vibes just like they supported Obama's solid messaging on hope and change.
  
  No, just no.
  You are even saying it yourself:
  They blame immigrants and DEI hires FOR THIER ECONOMIC WOES.
  Their problem is at the end of your own statement.
  Reputation leadership has offered up an easily digestible explanation. It's wrong, but it's an explanation.
  If deportations weren't being offered as a solution to economic woes (the underlying problem), then for most people who voted R, they wouldn't care about them.
  A desire for a solution to their woes are what they want. Bigotry isn't the goal of the voters, it's just a price they're willing to pay.
  Strike this in contrast from Republican LEADERSHIP. Bigotry and racism IS their goal, because their goal is to maintain a culture war to avoid class war.
  
  People who are not (or at least less) racist and bigoted wouldn't fall for Republican 'solutions' that involve deporting immigrants and blaming DEI. They want to believe that immigrants and DEI hires are to blame.
  
  Yeah but they want to believe anything simple will fix their lives.
  You can substitute any other simple answer. Trade deficits. A lying body of scientists. That a previous leader somehow betrayed them. It doesn't matter.
  Because any substitution fits the bill, that's why I say it isn't about the bigotry. It's about whatever leadership sold them. It just happens to be the case that what was for sale was bigotry. For (most) voters, it's a means to an end, not the end in and of itself.
  Don't get me wrong, hardcore bigots exist. Being able to recognize that it isn't useful to ignore that there are differences between those who'll (stupidly) accept bigotry as a solution to an actually existent issue (wealth loss) to those who see bigotry as a goal in and of itself. Recognizing the relative proportions between those two groups is valuable too.
  You'll make bad decisions if you're operating with an overly simplified model. This applies to Republican voters grasping for an explanation they can comprehend, as well as to democratic voters trying to understand the reality of the political landscape.
  
  Yeah but they want to believe anything simple will fix their lives.
  You can substitute any other simple answer. Trade deficits. A lying body of scientists. That a previous leader somehow betrayed them. It doesn’t matter.
  Do you think that Dem's solutions are more complicated?
  "Lets spend money on improving infrastructure and accept people who are different" seems pretty simple to me. So did 'let people choose who they want to be' and 'maybe the country that prides itself on immigration should welcome immigrants'. In fact, opposing the thing we brag about seems more complicated to me without the racist justification making it clear that it is about racism, not immigration.
  
  I actually do think the Dem answer is more complex because it doesn't actually provide an explanation to why things are bad. Why could a family in the 70s have a house, car, trips to Disney and 3 kids on a single income, but you can't do that now? Why?
  They're burdened by some semblance of responsibility to tell the truth, but the truth is REALLY inconvenient for both parties: both have been complicit in a broad set of neoliberal policy that has led to a concentration of wealth.
  Dems, not being able to stomach a bold faced lie, prefer to stay silent. Prefer to NOT reflect on the last 50 years and just say "we'll build more roads". You can shirk your share of responsibility by refusing to honestly review the past.
  Was that the problem? Not enough roads and bridges? Is that why I can't afford eggs?
  The Republican leadership, however, is completely unburdened by truth.
  Why could a family in 1970 blah blah blah... "Because you're paying so much taxes now because immigrants are getting a fortune in welfare"
  Yeah. It's WAY more simple. Because it's a lie. It answers the question. It's a fucking lie but it answers the question. The Dems literally don't provide any justification for the current state of affairs.
  
  I mean, eggs are not the problem. A temporary price increase due to bird flu is not relevant to either party’s policies
  Why could a family in 1970 blah blah blah…
  because minimum wage was never increased and should be at least double
  because death of unions: we need to build those up
  because everything is made overseas, let’s bring that back
  transition to sustainable energy, high speed rail, EVs are a huge opportunity for better paying jobs. Let’s invest in those
  we haven’t built or fixed anything in half a century
  modern world requires a good education. Let’s go
  
  So if we do those 6 things, I can own a detached home, car, and support a wife and 4 kids on a single income?
  "My brother works for a union in a state with a minimum wage twice as much as the federal one, and he still sure as hell can't afford a house, wife, and even 2 kids on his income alone"
  "I am in favor of bringing back manufacturing though, that's what all these terriffs are for, so thank god you agree with Trump on that"
  Edit: to be clear, I'm not saying you're wrong. I frankly don't think your points are enough. Corporate taxes are a large component that needs reform as well. I'm just saying how this hits the ear of someone who voted R, and why it's still much more complicated than the offered one liner :"You're poor because you're taxed out the butthole to support illegal immigrants". That single sentence lays out a simple cause, as well as suggests an obvious simple answer to the simple problem.
  
  we had amazing protective-angry-grandad ~~gives~~ vibes in '16 and '20 but that was too "radical" for the democratic powerbrokers and their mega donors .
  I have not seen one iota of change in the entrenched democratic party "stalwarts" yet. when the rubber met the road, they had one job to do and have now failed at it twice.
  edit to say: I agree with your reasoning here, but the current party makeup is apparently not up to the challenge.
  edit: word.
  
  I completely agree.
  I think this really serves to illustrate my one sub-point that just writing things off as "racism/bigotry" is detrimental to reforming the democratic party.
  As long as people who vote Dem are content to just accept Racism and Bigotry as justification for their own political failures, there is no incentive from the Party to stray from nominating stus quo neo-libs. They still are running as if it's 1993.

25 comments