Submitted by LetterGrouchy6053 t3_10cp4zk in Pennsylvania
Dredly t1_j4hcjmk wrote
I think posts like this vastly underestimate the strength of the "anyone but a democrat" voters. We saw it in the last election in PA. Oz, a scammer from NJ that was openly carpet bagging in PA still won 46.3% of the votes. Mastriano won 41.7% of the votes and basically stopped running 1/2 way through the campaign after he started pulling < 20 people to his rallies and went way off the deep end.
​
The success of the "Democrats are going to take everything you have, and give it to a minority single mother with 5 kids and 3 baby daddies because the daddies are all in jail because they murdered white people in drive by shootings for their gang" is so insanely integrated into the personality of republican voters, that they will die before they change their minds.
​
Republicans can, and have been, running the worst humanity has to offer, and winning, because of the success of this marketing message that started in the 70's. They don't THINK their constituents are crackpots, they KNOW they are brainwashed sheep who will always vote against their own self interests, as long as it is to beat the Democrats.
​
also, the Republican leadership has known for decades that this is a losing strategy long term, they just need to hold on long enough until they can make massive sweeping decisions that guarantee their control. This is why the gerrymandering, voter suppression, immigration prevention, blocking new districts (DC/PR), preventing birth control, claiming religious zealots, etc has been their platform, they NEED to cheat, because they know their message isn't received well by educated, minorities, and youth and they will lose as their base dies off
thenewtbaron t1_j4j86ir wrote
The thing about Mastriano was that he was NEVER a good candidate. he got like 40% of the primary. Most republicans didn't even want his ass.
That mentality that you talk about is exactly small town PA. I'm from one of those towns, a place that has been dying for 100 years and is about the kick the real bucket in the next couple. 22% of my home county's population is over 65 years old which is a couple of points higher than most places. The kids, the smart ones leave, they go off to college or run off to get a job elsewhere that makes real money. They think the town is dying because of "those city folks just draining money"... but no, there is no real industry there... and the loud crazy folks rule the roost. Why the hell would any person stay in a town like that willingly.
I have an uncle that about 13 years ago was happy to get a job at a factory/warehouse type joint for like 13$/hr. There were plenty of jobs less than an hour away that were paying 20$ at the time. They were advertising hard because they needed people. I was making like 17$/hr doing a state job. He didn't want to leave home, even if it meant bettering him position.
I had a friend in high school that we lost touch after he lost his damned mind babbling on about Obama and the exact thing you said, "all those welfare blah blah blah".... he was a dude that had three kids and trying to support them as a pizza boy. He did eventually find at a warehouse until he "hurt his back", probably doing something dumb because safety rules are for commies or something like that and had been out of work for months to years, trying to get a disability check. His kids and his wife was on welfare because he wasn't able to provide for them... so when he started spouting that out, I told him that HE was a welfare queen and the citizens of the commonwealth are paying for HIS kids and that is was pretty shitty to think that other people don't deserve that.
Fuck that place, I ran and am happier for it.
Dredly t1_j4juwg2 wrote
Grew up living in that world, it really is very difficult to see through the Fox News Bullshit and realize the reality of the situation.
roundstic3 t1_j4kwfp3 wrote
Reminds me of my dad, small town guy, full disclosure not actually in PA but town borders it, voting D now following the trump admin. Spent 35 years driving a truck, is retired now, always voted for whoever he considered to be the moderate republican, I think just out of a sense that life is quieter when the people you elect (these are the Romney types) don’t focus on social problems. Now he says the republicans running just aren’t decent people- and he’s finding out from friends and family many of them are switching too - this in an environment where conformity is huge so I have to think there’s a trend leftward in these places. So yeah the crazies are still getting forty whatever percent by they’re still losing around here
DrYIMBY t1_j4ivh1l wrote
We need more than two parties.
opticalpuss t1_j4iyxyg wrote
Need ranked choice voting and open primaries to get it.
Dredly t1_j4iw0fy wrote
we have more then 2 parties... people just won't vote for them because they stand basically no chance
TMax01 t1_j4l7cbe wrote
And they stand basically no chance because people don't vote for them. If the popularity of either of the existing big parties decreases, and the popularity of any one "third party" increased to the point they could win some state-wide or federal office, chances are they would become the new "second party" in this supposed "two party system". Any period of time where all three parties could present viable candidates would be very brief, at best. People would then vote for the new 2nd party instead of the one that lost popularity, and people who want to denigrate the results or the voters will continue to whine about the "two party system". This isn't because American voters are dumb or craven, it's because we are smart and think we're brilliant. Logically "gaming things out", a favorite practice in the US, will always end up with two major parties that share nearly 100% of offices between them. This is because there's only two positions on any policy or bill: aye or nay, yes or no, you're for it or against it. The reasons why and ways to improve the policy or bill are infinite, but the choice is still binary, and so both politicians and voters, being aware and self-determining, coalesce into two main ("primary") parties. And it will always be that way, and trying to change it will definitely NOT improve our politics in any way at all. Yes, other countries have a 'parliamentary system' which don't have only two major parties: instead they have only two factions, ever: the government (including all the minor parties that joined their "coalition" and so act as sock puppets for them) and the opposition (everybody else).
WhoTFKnowsWhatsBest t1_j4lmkrs wrote
The problem with the GOP strategy is that they aren’t pushing Democrats to have better ideas or seek better solutions for the people. Dems just have to stand back and give people that “this guy is crazy” look. Which they done for the most part. The 40% that voted for Oz or Mastriano were never Dems. And the slightly higher percentages were a combo of everything including not Oz/Mastriano.
This is pure shit for the people. We don’t get anything except see a bunch of money grubbing selfish old assholes fucking up the future.
The point of competition is that you push each other for the best. Politics is about pushing people yo not be the worst. Pure Trash!!!
Dredly t1_j4n4txv wrote
When one side's entire goal is literally to block 100% of everything and be "The party of no", for good or bad, the other side has little choice.
​
and Democrats have been making HUGE advances, despite Republicans, its just vastly more difficult to do so because of them
WhoTFKnowsWhatsBest t1_j4n8923 wrote
Both of these parties “work” for us. They could be much much better if both competed on making this better for the voters. Not blocking, or saying no or taking extreme positions to counter the opposition.
Dredly t1_j4ncsok wrote
No, ONE of these parties works for us. the OTHER party works for themselves. ONE of these parties is doing fantastic work, the other is not. They are not the same at all, one party is taking extremes and saying no at every chance they can, the other is not.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments