Just Who Votes For Who In The Trump Era?

[NKBJ]

I hear tell that hispanics are lining up for their carry permits after the El Paso Great Wal shoot'em up. Maybe they'll look at the gun grabbers and think about voting against them.

 

[femurphy77]

I hear tell that hispanics are lining up for their carry permits after the El Paso Great Wal shoot'em up. Maybe they'll look at the gun grabbers and think about voting against them.

It's sad when such an event triggers a flip flop amongst the people but then to a lot of people the 2A doesn't hold a lot of value. Until it affects them directly.

 

[Jludo]

You left out the stoners voting for Libertarians.

Weeds for Democrats, psychonauts are voting for libertarians.

 

[NKBJ]

There are indeed a lot of people who have looked up and recognized the commonality of anti-constitutionalism and the debth wish of the republithugs and dummycrats. The two main difficulties in rectifying that two-party situation seem to be who can resist the machine sufficiently to obtain election rather than selection and normalcy bias reinforced by comfort zone inclinations.

 

[jamil]

I have long said that if instead of voting for candidates we took a test on our views and our answers were translated into votes, about 25% each would be Dem and Rep, while the rest would be libertarian. You may not have noticed but there has been a profound shift in politics even though it is not widely discussed AND will take a few years to filter through the congress.

So just who are the voters of the political parties now in the age of Trump?

Republicans

pro-gun
pro-life
small business
financial
real estate
religious
independent minded
rural

Democrats

big business
international business
all education
major media
Hollywood
dependent minded
pro-abortion
urban

The big flip is big business and international business as many of them are so big they no longer feel the need for the protections of the US and our constitutional freedoms. Also there are many congressional representatives retiring, I believe it is because the voters are shifting. So called blue dog Democrats are now solidly Republican and wealthy suburbs are flipping Dem.

Any I have wrong?

Any to add?

Yeah. You left out the chamber-o-commerce Republicans. Authoritarian. Fudd. Pro corporatists. Globalist.

Speaking of authoritarian, you could throw that up for the left as well. Same with Globalist. Plus the Billary wing of the Democratic Party is pro-corporatist too. I guess chalk them both up for all three.

 

[Jludo]

And then we have exactly what the framers were trying to prevent with our constitutional republic a democracy, which is two wolves and one sheep voting on what to eat for lunch...

To the proportion that our government is democratic to begin with I'd wonder if voting directly on issues would be better than voting on representatives.

 

[Ingomike]

Yeah. You left out the chamber-o-commerce Republicans. Authoritarian. Fudd. Pro corporatists. Globalist.

Speaking of authoritarian, you could throw that up for the left as well. Same with Globalist. Plus the Billary wing of the Democratic Party is pro-corporatist too. I guess chalk them both up for all three.

Actually I pointed out the change in many of the groups you cite. The chamber usually are pro corporate and globalists. I think the chamber may have competing interests as mega-global-corps and their leftist tendencies vs local small business and their libertarian views. This is showing up in the voters for the party...

 

[Ingomike]

To the proportion that our government is democratic to begin with I'd wonder if voting directly on issues would be better than voting on representatives.

If you still have romantic notions about pure democracy you need to review the sheep and wolves story.

The framers actually built the system to not do something by creating circuit breakers all throughput. True democracy would have already had a vote banning all guns 50.02% to 49.08%...

 

[MCgrease08]

To the proportion that our government is democratic to begin with I'd wonder if voting directly on issues would be better than voting on representatives.

Hell no. Our system was specifically designed as a democratic republic to prevent legislation passed by popular vote.

It's impossible to protect the rights of the individual when the collective is so eager to vote those rights away based on popular opinion in the moment. How fast do you think we'd lose our gun rights if they were put to a popular vote the day after a mass shooting?

Direct voting on legislation is the antithesis of what our nation was founded on.

 

[Brad69]

Democrats = Socialist

Anti Semitic
Free Education
Free Healthcare
Green New Deal
Forced Labor Unions
Federally Mandated wage laws $15.00 hr
Federally Mandated housing price controls
The end of American Manufacturing
Changing Supreme Court to ensure Socialist rule
Repeal the 2AD
“Paris Treaty” this ensures economic disaster
Iran Nuclear Pact this ensures the End of Israel
Open Borders
Unlimited flood of immigration “no illegal immigration it will not be a crime”
Free healthcare for non citizens
Economic Disaster
Unemployment
Reparations
Student Debt Forgiveness
China




Republican = American

 

[Jludo]

If you still have romantic notions about pure democracy you need to review the sheep and wolves story.

The framers actually built the system to not do something by creating circuit breakers all throughput. True democracy would have already had a vote banning all guns 50.02% to 49.08%...

Clearly we're talking past one another. Our government is in part democratic, I'm questioning if that part could be put up to a vote instead of using representatives.
None of that says we scrap the republic part of the system or abolish the 2a.

 

[Jludo]

Hell no. Our system was specifically designed as a democratic republic to prevent legislation passed by popular vote.

It's impossible to protect the rights of the individual when the collective is so eager to vote those rights away based on popular opinion in the moment. How fast do you think we'd lose our gun rights if they were put to a popular vote the day after a mass shooting?

Direct voting on legislation is the antithesis of what our nation was founded on.

So your contention is that our level headed representatives are the only thing protecting our gun rights? I'm not advocating we abolish the bill of rights or leave everything up to the 51%

I honestly dont even have a proposal, I'm Just thinking out loud for a solution for the problem pointed out above. That you might disagree with your representative on 99% of the issues but they will vote against an AWB so you have to vote for them.

 

[MCgrease08]

Clearly we're talking past one another. Our government is in part democratic, I'm questioning if that part could be put up to a vote instead of using representatives.
None of that says we scrap the republic part of the system or abolish the 2a.

It does suggest scrapping the Republic part of the system, seeing as that's the part that requires elected representation.

 

[Jludo]

It does suggest scrapping the Republic part of the system, seeing as that's the part that requires elected representation.

I should've emphasized the constitutional republic part.
Instead of congressman voting on legislation it falls to the people to vote directly on it. The resulting legislation would still be subject to the constitution, the other branches etc.

 

[jamil]

To the proportion that our government is democratic to begin with I'd wonder if voting directly on issues would be better than voting on representatives.

No.

 

[Jludo]

No.

Any solution to the problem of wanting to keep guns but not agreeing with anything else Republicans do?

 

[jamil]

Is that a question or a statement? Kinda missing some punctuation so I’m not sure.

 

[Jludo]

Is that a question or a statement? Kinda missing some punctuation so I’m not sure.

Obviously it's not a solution for you so I'm asking for one.

 

[BugI02]

Any solution to the problem of wanting to keep guns but not agreeing with anything else Republicans do?

Move to Vermont?

 

[BugI02]

So your contention is that our level headed representatives are the only thing protecting our gun rights? I'm not advocating we abolish the bill of rights or leave everything up to the 51%

I honestly dont even have a proposal, I'm Just thinking out loud for a solution for the problem pointed out above. That you might disagree with your representative on 99% of the issues but they will vote against an AWB so you have to vote for them.

The solution is a case that provokes an unequivical ruling by SCOTUS that "... shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says. Then you wouldn't have to worry about an AWB and could vote against the guy you are in such disagreement with

I think avoiding taking a case to that level is playing not to lose and seldom works out well

Edit: But given what a squish Roberts is, I'd rather that case was pled after Ginsberg is taking a dirt nap