Huh? What the hell do you base this generalization on? I've lived in the south. There's still a lot of pretty f-cked up values and morals on display as part of mainstream culture down there. A classic case of talking a good game, but being full of shite.
Can I try to use this to illustrate the biggest reason why Bush won? Not what he said, but what he's saying. Kerry isn't superliberal. Democrats aren't superliberal. But Republicans successfully defined Kerry, and "liberal democrats" as anti-God, anti-guns, soft-on-defense, pro-gay, etc etc etc. Republicans painted a clear, unfavorable picture of "the other america". Democrats never painted a clear, favorable picture of "this is our great america". Look to what the above poster is referring to..."outsiders...liberal democrats...urban elites" Those aren't real people. Those are projections of negative attributes, applied to almost the entire democratic party. Look no further as to how to explain the results of the election.
This is a great post. Sure 'bout that? I'll bet it's suburban, not rural. Then why is the Republican position on gay marrige NOT Dick Cheney's position (that it should be left up to the states)? And why do they support so strongly a rich Connecticut guy who comes from generations of inherited wealth? No, we believe in live and let live. It is your side that wants to outlaw abortion for everyone. It's your side that wants to prevent gay people from getting married. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one!! If you don't want a gay marriage, don't have one!! (I know I'm oversimplifying the issue, but HE'S the guy making the libertarian, "small r" Republican, contradicted by the facts argument.) And we hate it when you guys act like you have superior patriotism and morality. Let's call it even. No, we "despise" (I don't, but whatever) him because he makes BAD decisions. The UN was right that it was a bad idea to invade Iraq to get rid of their WMDs. Snow was right when he argued that more tax cuts would cause more harm than good. THAT'S the problem we have with Bush. Yes, God forbid we get the information first, THEN act on it. Oh, we DON'T believe in right and wrong??? What if it's not worth doing? Sorta like a guy who orders us into Fallujah, then backs down because the number of deaths is hurting his poll numbers. Sorta like a guy who flipflops on steel tariffs. Or setting up the 9/11 commission. Or the DHS. Or going after al-Sadr. And on and on and on. IOW, they believe that the guy they like is decisive because they're ignorant of the uncountable times he's vacillated for political reasons. It's not a coincidence that Karl Rove is the first political advisor to have an office so close to a President's. Yes, God forbid a politician have thoughts. That he overwhelmingly received the votes of people who voted on security issues yet are wrong on the most fundamental facts of the issue? OK, you got one right. Broken clock and all that.
What he said. GOP succeeded in building a pretty damn conving strawman, and the majority of voters did not like that strawman one bit.
And you're calling me on a strawman? I didn't say they base either their politics or Constitution on religious doctrine. I just said that many of them - most of them in fact - were guided by their faith, which is often overlooked here. In fact, I'd bet that were Franklin or Washington alive today, they'd be among the most hated figures on the BS political forum. Lastort, OTOH, did say that Religion didn't play a part in American politics, and I'm simply calling Bullsh!t. To some degree - from the earliest stages of the founding of this country (which is why I brought up the pilgrims), faith, religion, values, etc have always played a part in American politics. Acting like this is the first election where faith has ever mattered is beyond stupidity.
Why? Bush supporters have beaten you now in three straight national elections. Dems need to stop telling Bush supporters what they do and don't need to be doing, pull their head out of their superiorly informed asses, and present an actual platform that people care about. I say this as somebody whose #1 issue is the environment, but has absolutely no incentive to vote Democratic. Democrats have no better plan to straighten out the USA than the Republicans. It's a wash. So I move on to my #2 issue, which is that I don't believe that entitlement legislation - Social Security, Welfare, etc - helps out anybody but the institutions who regulate those entitlements. Bigger governments, more taxes, more regulation in general doesn't work - IMO. So given #1 is a wash, I have to go with the Republican party because they better reflect my views on #2. When the Dems actually come up with a plan for #1 - I'm open to discussion.
Private reflection? Commencing every meeting with prayer? Taking two days to pray for help? This is private? Anyway - nice try on the strawman. I never said that they wanted "religion in politics." I said that religion, faith, etc have always been a part of American politics. Huge distinction.
Re the "southern" issue - as someone who grew up in the south, i can tell you that -generally- religious (and most are) southerners tend to be very close-minded. they believe what their daddies believed and what their grandaddies believed. and it really permeates even to those who aren't from the area. My parents are actually life long yankee democrats, but we just happened to get stationed in the south. and growing up, my beliefs leaned toward the republican, even though i'd consider myself a feminist and centrist. and when people tried to educate me, i didn't want to hear it. even if i agreed with what they were saying! you aren't a real southerner (or a nice person!) if you believe all those "evil baby killing liberals".. thank God i moved to the west coast... but alas, i am in Ohio now - which scarily enough seems to be more conservative than the south. i can't wait to get out of here. BACK TO THE OCEAN!
Your distinction is wrong. People's individual convictions have always been a part f politics. But not religion itself.
That'd certainly make a lot of sense.......but if Kerry gets less than an additional 1% in Ohio, we're suddenly talking about how middle america supported him this year. In other words, the South hates liberals, yes. Middle America is still......in the middle.
I'm a Southern Christian that DESPISES George Bush. It's sad to me that so many vote on social(read: moral) issues and not on issues that will actually help them. All these "moralled" folk think that Bush is a good man but he is a terrible President.
You know, I really wish everyone that says that the South will rise again, even jokingly, would just get on with it already. We'd be much better off without them - not because of conservatism or religious fanaticism, but because they just adamantly refuse to vote for anyone that doesn't have a southern accent, and as a result are extremely unhealthy for the American political process. Northeasterners and people from the west coast have no problem voting for southerners (Clinton, Gore, Carter, etc), nor do people from the upper Midwest, but people from the South simply won't vote for northerners, period. I don't get it. (Yes, I realize Bush is actually from Connecticut.)
Sorry, Dave, but this is such Bullsh!t it is laughable. Fine - let me live, then. When I make a sh!tload of money, don't ask me to give back my "fair share." Eliminate tax brackets. Give me back the money that goes to public education - I don't support it, my kids don't participate in it, and I'd rather use it to buy expensive and useless toys. That shouldn't matter to you - right? I mean, you believe in "live and let live." Don't tell me that a certain percentage of my income has to go into a public retirement fund called Social Security. I want out. I can do better on my own, and I don't feel like paying for your lack of preparation for when you are 80 years old. Again - this shouldn't bother you at all, because you believe in "live and let live." Right? Oh, and by the way, I don't feel like paying for your ass when you lose your job anymore. Give me back my money. And I don't feel like paying for the crack whore who has 7 kids and a nice welfare check to boot. Give me back my money. And a refund for past expenses. I'm not paying for unemployment or welfare programs anymore. Again, with your new-founded "live and let live" policy, I am sure this won't distress you at all. Another thing - quit telling me who I can and cannot hire. If I want to hire the poster child for the Aryan Nation, so be it. No more incentives for me to hire minorities. I'll make my own choices from here on out. No more paying subsidies or giving preference to minority quotas in public institutions. Give me back my money. Rip up Title IX, throw it on the ground, and piss on it. If I want to hire an Indian, then fire him for an Indonesian because he's even cheaper - that shouldn't bother you, right? "Live and let live," baby. Outsource central - here we come! Fact is, both sides of the aisle have no intention of living and letting the other live. You believe you are right - and you will try to enact legislation that forces me to conform to your way of doing things. And guess what? So do I. There is no such thing as "live and let live" in American politics, and for the most part, despite all of America's flaws, we're all better off because of it.
I think it's clear where/when the south turned red-I don't argue that. The point that I think was being made was the role of abortion in shaping the GOP as it is today-and this is where Reagan was different then Nixon re: the evangelical vote. You can see it in the way that group looks at W vs his father. Even with the change on race in the south, IMO it's a different GOP without the evangelical block that Reagan secured.
Bzzz. Wrong, but close. You're almost there. Faith, often guided by one's religion, is a subset of "convictions," and thus has always played a part in American politics. My distinction is dead-on.
Amen. This guy is totally right. I don't think the Dems have to be more like the Republicans, jus tbetter at what they do. The Republicans are so far to the right now, yet they continue to successfully paint themselves as 'conservative'. Sh!t, these 'conservatives' make Pat Buchanon look like George Mcgovern.
Speaking for Georgia citizens in general.... Obviously, terrorists could enter the country by sea or from Canada or Mexico. Virtually any portion of the country is a potential target. I am an insurance adjuster. While this is not in any way a glamorous job, I do handle claims for a company that primarily covers military officers. In the course of my job, I get to interact with military officers of all ranks and have had many discussions with them about the terror war. Recently I had an interesting conversation with an officer who trains and oversees special ops and is a counterterrorism advisor and trainer for the US military. We discussed potential targets of terrorism in general terms. I stated to him that our most devastating loss would be if the Hoover Dam was destroyed. He stated that this is a primary target that is currently under surveillance and constant guard (and in a state that voted for Bush). He then stated that the problems were not the obvious targets but the secondary ones of which there are to many to realistically guard all at once. He went on to state that the Buford Dam just North of Atlanta is a secondary target whose destruction would cause about as much devastation as the Hoover dam. Atlanta, which is the southeasts transportation hub, home of the home offices of Coca-Cola, IBM and Home Depot, as well as the CDC, would be wiped out. Georgia is also home of the Savannah river site where the nations nuclear weapons are manufactured. I can't vouch for the thought process of the rest of the Bush states but Georgians are in the center of a big terror bullseye. I guess what I am trying to say is that you can't make the above generalization....at least with regards to Georgia. Speaking for this particular Georgia citizen... I tend to lean conservative. That being said, I am not a huge fan of Cheney, Rummey and Wolfie. If there ever was an election that I would have voted Democrat, it is this one. I was very torn at the voting booth. In the end, I just don't see the world the same way that alot of far lefties do. Their is an element of the demos that doesn't like religion and I go to church. The lefties in politics, the court system and the media try to promote the gay agenda which I do not agree with. Socialism and all the public benefits sound great until we reach the magic number of 51% who are dependent on the government for their livelihood. When that happens, are we still free? On the conservative side, the republican environmental stance and an unwillingness to aggressively persure alternative fuel sources as part of the war on terror infuriates me. I guess I just see American politics as the U.S.S.A. vs. America Inc. and I am waiting for a visionary who combines a respect for America's traditions with a willingness to break party lines. I can't speak for all Georgians but this one who voted for Bush would have voted against him if the option was a centrist Demo instead of a senator with an incredibly liberal voting record. The two primary contenders through the demo primaries were "I have a scream" Dean and Senator Kerry. I looked to see if the demos would supply a candidate that I would be willing to risk an adminstration change on during a time of war. Kerry was unispiring IMHO. Zell Miller may have a screw loose but if you scrape away all of the good-ol-boy rehtoric politians would be wise to find a grain of wisdom there in dealing with the south. If the demos insist on aligning themselves with the far left of there party, they are going to find it very difficult to gain inroads into the South and its approx 140 electoral votes. Just an opinion from someone who has lived in Georgia for 20 yrs.
Whereas Massachusetts and New York Liberals who vote lockstep democrat in election after election are ok. Take a look at the land area of the states that Bush won compared with Kerry. I'm sure that their alot of people outside of the south who would love to see the left coast and northeast out of the rest of the country's hair too. Northerners remain unpopular in rural Georgia. I save my enmity for Bostonians and New Yorkers. Of course this isn't political and has more to do with getting kicked out of Fenway and the combined effects of the 1996 and 1999 world series.
Funny you mention two states with GOP governors, not to mention that NYC has elected Republican mayors in 3 straight elections.
According to the exit polls (I know, I know) at CNN.com, of the following groups... No High School H.S. Graduate Some College College Graduate Postgrad Study ...the ones that went for Kerry were "No High School" (50-49) and "Postgrad Study" (55-44). "H.S. Graduate" (52-47), "Some College" (54-46), and "College Graduate" (52-46) all went to Bush.