Well… yes. In America the diet right supports the top, and the far right supports the top even harder. The 3 actual leftists support the bottom. So it’s still true.
Sure, but he’s talking to Texas voters. Enough of them think of Republican and Christian as fundamentally bonded parts of their identity that it’s going to be a real job getting them to vote in a way that will actually serve their interests.
If a person thinks “I am a Republican,” it’s not enough to just suggest that maybe they ought to change their allegiance. You’ve got to give them a pathway to consider a compromise so that you can show them a better way.
Of course, if he gets elected and then either he or the Democratic Party don’t actually deliver, they’ll have truly screwed the pooch, even more than they currently have.
Yeah, I’m Texan and what he said makes a lot more sense in that context. My Trump-voter parents have voiced outright leftist views, but despise the same views given different wording. Like you mentioned, I think a lot of folks treat political affiliation as a team sport tied to their identity more than the sum of their actual beliefs.
Like I’m sure plenty of people think of themselves as Republicans because of the idea of Republicans being no-nonsense, fiscally responsible, patriots and then just support various policies based on their chosen team, instead of putting their views first and their label second. I think plenty could - as long as you avoid certain trigger words - see logically that social programs are good and helpful. Again, you’ve got to be careful to avoid phrases ingrained in them as signs of weak, whiny, God-hating, flag-burning Liberals, but I think only the most hardheaded and entrenched self-proclaimed conservatives would argue against things like food banks and firefighters
The truth is that winning elections in a country without mandatory voting isn’t about shifting those rusted-on voters - it’s about getting those who don’t usually vote to step up and do so. A certain percentage will just ALWAYS vote their respective party, because they lack any sense of reflection that would be required to make a genuinely considered choice.
The left supports the bottom and the right supports the top.
Maybe in the rest of world, but in the US we have far right, and diet right. No true left outside of a few specific politicians
Same in Canada too. Everyone thinks we’re WAY better then we are.
Well… yes. In America the diet right supports the top, and the far right supports the top even harder. The 3 actual leftists support the bottom. So it’s still true.
Sure, but he’s talking to Texas voters. Enough of them think of Republican and Christian as fundamentally bonded parts of their identity that it’s going to be a real job getting them to vote in a way that will actually serve their interests.
If a person thinks “I am a Republican,” it’s not enough to just suggest that maybe they ought to change their allegiance. You’ve got to give them a pathway to consider a compromise so that you can show them a better way.
Of course, if he gets elected and then either he or the Democratic Party don’t actually deliver, they’ll have truly screwed the pooch, even more than they currently have.
Yeah, I’m Texan and what he said makes a lot more sense in that context. My Trump-voter parents have voiced outright leftist views, but despise the same views given different wording. Like you mentioned, I think a lot of folks treat political affiliation as a team sport tied to their identity more than the sum of their actual beliefs.
Like I’m sure plenty of people think of themselves as Republicans because of the idea of Republicans being no-nonsense, fiscally responsible, patriots and then just support various policies based on their chosen team, instead of putting their views first and their label second. I think plenty could - as long as you avoid certain trigger words - see logically that social programs are good and helpful. Again, you’ve got to be careful to avoid phrases ingrained in them as signs of weak, whiny, God-hating, flag-burning Liberals, but I think only the most hardheaded and entrenched self-proclaimed conservatives would argue against things like food banks and firefighters
The truth is that winning elections in a country without mandatory voting isn’t about shifting those rusted-on voters - it’s about getting those who don’t usually vote to step up and do so. A certain percentage will just ALWAYS vote their respective party, because they lack any sense of reflection that would be required to make a genuinely considered choice.