but unless you're a dead sheep, it's "dyed in the wool".

I am a white lower-middle-class sort of person, and I say they can go pound sand. They are not the victims here.

What does that accomplish?

It does not appear to me that they are needed to proceed at this point. They need to "swallow" it, see?

They have no influence without the koch brothers financing them, creating parties for them, and giving them lessons in how to organize.

However, the kochs ARE doing all these things. It may be necessary to strip them of their followers.

And the people who enable that.

it is WE, the bottom 80%, who will have "to go pound sand" - until we learn how to unite, at least a little.

But my point is that we, the progressives, have the numbers, we have the right to run things here, if this is a democratic country. We are not required to baby-sit these fools so we can get on to our own urgent business, of which there is a dauntingly high pile already.

We'll see.

But only if they did what you said.

Hey, if it works, I'll shut up...

I was pointing out that something seems to be working...or else Brownback really just pissed off enough people that they'd rather vote for people they think are crooks over him. (I'm leaning this way in my thinking.)

I don't know why it's working. I wish I did because we could really screw the GOP if we could suddenly make OK, KS, NE, MO swing states. That seems to be the base of Kansas-style thinking.

He's really, really good at it.

Florida--cutting everything that benefits real people and that even conservative, middle class Republicans like, while giving state contracts to cronies--including people and companies from out-of-state, so that the money doesn't even stay in-state.

The idiots here pushed out the more moderate Republican legislators in a Tea-Party primary massacre, so he has a powerful legislature of true believers to do his bidding. With their help he pushed through a draconian tax cut that left everything in the state flat broke. No money for schools, roads, social services, or anything else. He disbanded the State Arts Commission, thus throwing away something like $1.2 million in federal matching funds and costing many jobs at the state and local level. After promising to take federal money to set up a state exchange for the ACA, he reversed course and rejected it to please his Tea Party buddies.

In Kansas a lot of people who have always voted Republican, including those who went for the most conservative Tea Party Republican they could find in the 2010 election, are actually feeling the direct impact of the crap Brownback and his minions have been pulling here, and now that it is smacking them flat, the are finding out that maybe they don't like it as much as they expected to.

Another effect of the Brownback/Tea Party take-over in Kansas is that many more moderate Republicans have simply dropped out of the Republican Party to register as Independents or even to become Democrats. Even before dropping their "R" identification, a few of them came right out and endorsed Democratic candidates in the last election.

Brownback has been trying to turn Kansas into an ultraconservative utopia. He has had enough success with his program for a lot of Kansans who really believed that was exactly what they wanted to realize that maybe they got that wrong.

Kansas was until recently more of a 3-party state, because the moderate Republicans, who didn't get along with the ultraconservative Republicans, voted often enough with the Democrats to prevent the legislature from completely steamrolling Democrats. Sebelius and other Democrats were able to become governor here because they got enough backing from those Republican moderates. The Republcian conservatives hated the moderates with a passion, so they were beyond gleeful when they were able to primary them out of the legislature and take complete control.

We need more votes on our side. I cannot imagine preferring just feeling superior to them - that's the only benefit left. Plus they might convince more of the soft middle.

Last edited Sun Oct 27, 2013, 02:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Especially when our nation is in deep trouble and the public business needs to be done. We can come back and "win them over" later.

And we can't change that very quickly or easily.

They are overrepresented in the Senate right now.

Some of them might not be intransigent. We have to win somebody over, in order to get more reasonable people in the House.

You are delusional if you think you are going to "win them over" with talk. I'm white. I grew up in this culture, they are not going to listen to reason. They would not know reason if it walked up and clubbed them up side the head. They are upset, they feel threatened, they threaten the rest of us. We need to kick their asses politically, is what we need, and they are not the answer to that, for obvious reasons. And then we need to address the nation's problems, which are many and dire.

Everyone, including them. Right now they have enough representation in the House to shut the government down.

Some of them can be swayed. I know two who voted for Obama the first time. Now they think he's a Muslim. But one was smart enough to know her food stamps and Medicare were not approved of by Republicans.

You are free to work on them all you want, I approve, and anyone else who is up for it, but I do no want MY party paying the slightest attention to their opinions about much of anything in the next elections, being like them is not the answer, and it never was the answer. The last thirty years is what that got for us, a long bitter downhill ride.

Not about adopting their opinions. They are not all intransigent. A lot of them are just dumb. They need to see where their interests lie.

I said ignore their opinions completely.

Thank you.

It's not only their Saudi Channel media owner at FOX who points fingers at the nearest American targets of their resentments and prejudices; it's their own proclivity to keep civil war conflict up; it's their ideology to resolve by a win/lose system, rather than a win/win system. It's their belief in scarcity; and that resources are finite for them; that more 'love' to some fellow American is less 'love' for them. Religious belief in 'truth' never gets 'convincing' that it's wrong by any means. Their opinions got formed in youth and hardened by church/Fox/social bubble confirmation. Their mental reality 'maps' are righteous and 'right,' and do not allow for re-mapping or new data. They never grew up; their bodies just got bigger.

Good luck.

I tell "conservatives"--if you're really sincere about government incompetence and inefficiency, then you should agree that the military would be a lush target for cuts. Lt. Col. Robert Bowman used to say that if we repurposed the DoD to defending our own borders we could cut the military budget by 80%.

Of course the "conservatives" won't hear of it. So then I like to taunt them: do you think us civilians are such wusses that we couldn't defend our own country if Canada or Mexico invaded us? You think we need Big Government to do the job for us?

Than the poor. And disabuse them of the notion they are going to be in the 1% someday. Hanging onto that has got to get in the way of their reality eventually.

They have this foreign (and by "foreign" I mean out of body) entity attached to their brains called Right Wing Talk Radio that tells them what they see and what they hear. Some people need someone else to tell them what to think because they are unsure of themselves and their own convictions.

They have basically moved into cult territory. We are dealing with a cult whose wagons are already circled. Outsiders are total evil and listening, negotiating or compromising with us is blasphemous and worthy of excommunication. We are the devil to them.

Cults never end well. Once something has latched onto the brain of a person who needs to be led around and guided by others, it's very hard to get them to detach. Their members usually all commit suicide when they feel the evil of the outside world is overtaking them.

Suicide in this sense means total abandonment of Right Wing ideology and I think the only way you're going to get that is if they all lose big time. And that means letting their nightmare scenario of us play out. Let them think we're monsters. Forget trying to make them feel comfortable. Let them scream and wail while we transform the political, economic, social and ethical landscape to be more sensitive, fair, tolerant and inclusive. Eventually, they'll wake up, look around and wonder what the hell they were screaming about.

It's like the classic Upton Sinclair quote, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

The lower middle class whites are not wrong that they've been stolen from over the last thirty years. The part they've got wrong is that they think (1) their take-home pay has gone down because taxes are going up and (2) the "extra" that is coming out of their paychecks is being spent on goodies for poor people both domestically and abroad.

We at DU know that the real problem is that the fruits of economic growth and increased productivity have been systematically siphoned off by corporations and their wealthy owners and executives -- and we have the charts and figures to prove it. But the Tea Partiers and even less rabid segments of the working class don't seem to get the message, and it's not just because they listen to Fox News.

It's because of the Upton Sinclair principle. They're incapable of blaming their bosses, because those are the people they depend on for their livelihood, and even thinking nasty thoughts about them sets up intolerable anxiety. So instead they look at their paystubs and blame the poor. Or they blame the unions, if they're still lucky enough to have union dues deducted. Or they blame greedy old geezers. Anybody but the people responsible -- because those are the people with real power over their lives.

The "lazy, shiftless negro" meme goes all the way back to slavery.

You state "the white lower middle class is not on average stupid, but is on average racist".

As the understanding that no stealing is occurring and that whites receive the vast majority of assistance (both lower class and corporate) can be reached by anyone with intelligence, the problem is not that we have not been convincing them we are not stealing from them, the problem is they are letting their racism overrule their intelligence.

If they are willing to do what they have been doing, which is inhumane, immoral and, BTW, unChristian, and which may eventually destroy the country just so they can keep their white privilege, what sort of education do you believe will help?

When in fact they themselves might be net recipients.

and this "they're stealing from us" narrative is merely reinforced by Democratic electoral strategies ... we (myself included) know, and make a big deal, of the electoral benefits of immigration reform and fighting against voter suppression (to take two examples); but it feeds into the fears of the cohort you identify ... immigration reform = more legal statused "others" to steal from them, fighting voter suppression = empowering those "others" to steal from them.

I don't have an answer.

We need new ideas about this, and I'm about a generation and a half too late (I'm 37).

Yes, you're right: plenty of liberal people have never had the opportunity to travel. So sorry, and I'll correct that.

It just stood out to me. No offense intended.

and have used arguments, graphs, statistics showing that the majority of government welfare goes to red, white states. It does no good at all to change their minds. My only reason for posting the info isn't to sway or convince the Baggers that dominate the local site, but to convince the fence sitters, I hate calling them independents, that are watching the "discussions."
I even challenged them, the red necks, to come out and show where they never accepted government benefits, that they call handouts. None came forward. Most of the baggers I found out were on food stamps, welfare, unemployment comp., SS disability, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, etc etc., it mattered not, they still preach about the evil government.
What the left needs, IMHO, is a Frank Luntz to turn the tide. Sound bites and key words seem to have more of a lasting impact than rational discussion.

By and large, the conservative receivers of benefits I encounter believe that they deserve the benefits they get; they believe they have earned them. "Earning" the benefits is sometimes personal- "I have worked since I was 14...." and sometimes by proxy- "my dad worked hard all his life paying into the system...."
In contrast, they don't believe others have earned them. The GOP and media do an excellent job of perpetuating this.

rational discussion does not work with the majority of those who need to learn the truth. IMO, only living under a bridge in a cardboard box will help the majority. By then, of course, it is too late to salvage anything for anybody.

But maybe that's what needs to happen. I have lost hope in any other solutions.

His name is George Lakoff:

"Framing the issues: UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics"
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml

In addition, the conservative denial of how the 1% are stealing way beyond the scope of poor minority folk is inexplicable.
How people can condemn a minority of people accepting a miniscule percentage of our tax dollars while corporate entities walk off with enormous sums while paying no taxes can only be explained by acknowledging the inherent racism that has infected our nation.

We're right. We know that. But we have to persuade. And people who are wrong can persuade too, sometimes better than people who are right (see Plato on this).

I remind myself that more people still buy bleached and denatured bread that is bad for them rather than whole wheat that is good for them.
Merely pointing our that we often do not act in our own interests in many matters.

claim makes tons of money and control the entertainment business?
I think you give them far too much credit for intelligent processing. They don't act out of any actual reasons, it is not what they think, it is what they believe, much of that is purely about religion. It's faith based hate, not the product of poorly informed reasoning.

That is, I think Kansans (or whoever) who watch Ellen on daytime TV are happy to start turning around on marriage equality because it's no economic skin off their nose, while the GOP has convinced them that racial equality is skin off their nose (falsely, but that's what they now believe). That's why marriage equality is inexorably advancing while the Voting Rights Act just got overturned.

If the GOP could have found a way to turn homophobia into a paycheck argument, they would have, but that's even less plausible than the racial argument.

And, yes, religion has a lot to do with this, but I'd say it's a symptom rather than a cause (it's not that religious people become conservative, but that conservative people become religious).

To claim they are 'happy to start turning on marriage equality' is fully fictional thinking. Kansas has no civil unions and a constitutional amendment against marriage equality. 51% are opposed, 9% 'unsure' and 39% in favor. The laws remain as they are.
Until 2003 gay sex was against the law there.
Adoptions are not possible under their laws either.

To paint that as 'happy to start turning on marriage equality' is a bit much. Mountains of discrimination and contempt. At least be honest about it.

I meant that working class whites are orders of magnitude more open to marriage equality than they were 20 years ago, but if anything less accepting of social spending.

laws it was also the wealthy and virtually all minority groups that also upheld bigoted views, what united them was religion. Church goers of all incomes and races make up the current and past opposition to equality.

even when their vote hurts themselves. At least some of this irrational voting stems from being exposed to baby killing memes their entire lives. At church, in the home, in school and in the government, the evils of evolution, separation of church and state, abortion, contraception and feminism spouted by authority figures (parents, pastors, professors and politicians) over-rules objective thinking. Many of these people believe that our society as a whole is being judged and would gladly give up "entitlements" for the greater reward they believe to be waiting for them in heaven.

In their minds voting for the Republican who would eliminate SNAP benefits causing their own children to go hungry is far better than voting for the Democrat that would uphold Roe v Wade, stop the teaching of creationism in public schools, and forbid Kansas lawmakers from establishing Christianity as the official state religion.

But you nailed it here. Add in whatever other nonsense some of them are fed in their evangelical churches and there you have it.

I actually go to church here in Texas - it's a social thing down here. Many of them have switched their focus to good works because that is how you attract community-minded folks. But there are many folks out there who are still convincing themselves that their reward comes in mythical heaven. That mindset is really hard to deal with.

Explicitly atheist societies have had their entrenched 1% too

includes keeping the LIVs on Believe-the-Lies Street. How can one compete with Fox News when the telecoms have a Protect the Billionaires agenda, too? What mass media does not have a Protect the Billionaires agenda?

Maybe without realizing it, they've fallen into the trap of believing they're just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. Even the Great Depression and the Great Recession haven't cured them of it. I know, because I saw it every day while living in a certain IN town near the IL border, and I see it here in, in blue-dot Indy, all too often too.

I don't much care anymore. I like Indy, but nothing can change the fact that it's in a hopelessly red state. That has consequences, like having a state government that won't set up a health insurance exchange and won't expand Medicaid. And even here, college graduates like myself aren't appreciated. An example: A few years ago, the manager of a temp agency that hires college grads to grade essay questions from standardized tests tried shopping around the résumés he had to other companies in the area. I think he was partly just wanting to see what would happen. He got no takers. And yet supposedly TPTB lament the "brain drain" problem in this state. Even at my age, I'm thinking of leaving once I finish my paralegal courses, especially if this state doesn't get its health care house in order.

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." - Dwight Eisenhower

Forgive me for quoting a republican.

Thoughtful and thought provoking.

They are wrong but it doesn't matter - because who and what they listen to daily (rw radio, fox "news", their churches, each other) tells them otherwise. And poor working people see that they themselves are working hard all day but those on welfare have the day off. That's what they believe and this bullshit narrative is not challenged within the confines of their narrow circles.

Breaking through these barriers is not going to be easy. They will not suddenly be interested in our opinion because they have enjoyed the open-air denigration of 'liberal' and 'democrat' for a generation now. As a Democrat and a Liberal, I understand perfectly well the concept of 'live and let live'. If somebody wants to believe a fairytale, it's not our business to convince them otherwise; it's all part of the great diversity of life. But the right wing doesn't believe in just fairytales, they cling to utter nonsense and twists on the truth that feed into a seething hatred of life and people that affects all of us. Only personal calamity seems to break down that wall when they are forced into a position of need *and* the insane hatred of their fellow conservatives suddenly gets directed at them. These are circumstances that we cannot control, nor would it be right to try making them happen (that would be revenge but it wouldn't win hearts and minds).

So the question is, what are our options? Since Liberals don't control the liberal media (sic), what can we do to dilute the poison they concoct and spew out on a daily basis?

I don't know.

Since Nixon took the country off the gold standard, this has not been true. Taxes now create demand for dollars but, once paid to the federal government, may as well cease to exist. Since the government can create money, we may as well view it as creating each dollar it spends and destroying each dollar it receives. Since nothing but fear of inflation keeps the government from creating as much money as it wants, the question for each budget should be "how big a difference between taxes and spending do we want?". It does need to make up the shortfall in circulating currency caused by net importing and net saving.

Viewed this way, taxes don't "pay for the government," they are an essential part of the economic system maintained by the government for the benefit of all Americans.

You know how Republicans win votes in places like Kansas?

They tell those white working class people "liberal elites think they are better than you".

And the great thing about that talking point? It happens to be true.

Here you are, looking down your noses at them. You say, and think, that they are racist.

Let me repeat the question you asked, which I think is a great question
"why haven't we convinced them that we want to advance their interests?"

Them being - the white working class, or even more specifically white working class males.

Now who is "we"? We could be "Democrats running for office" or it could be "DU".

I hear far more from DU than I do from Democrats running for office, especially nationwide (I am not paying all that much attention to the campaign of Ms. Nunn for Senate in Georgia, for example (although I just read about her this morning)).

So if the question was "Why hasn't DU convinced white working class males that we want to advance their interests?"

And to me, the answer is obvious. Obvious in the kinds of things DU says, and DU is concerned about. Paraphrased like this

We need to help the minorities. (because white people are privileged)
We need to help women. (because men are privileged)
We need to help immigrants. (because natives are privileged)
We need to help GLBTQ (because straight people are privileged)
(non liberal) White people are racists.
(non liberal) Men are sexists.
(non liberal) Straight people are homophobes.
(non liberal?) Christians are hypocrites and bigots

So why can't we convince those racist, sexist, homophobic Talibornagains that we want to advance their interests?

That is a puzzler, for sure, but thank goodness we don't have to figure it out, because soon they will be a minority. Rue ha, ha, ha.

I'm trying to convey to the left side of the party, in the form of this board, the dilemma the national party faces, which you adeptly illustrated.

it will need to convince a lot of whites and males.

But you switched from working class to middle class. Why?

Presumably the left on DU want the national party to be more like the left on DU.

I probably should; "middle class" shops at Target and "working class" at Wal-Mart, as a cultural example. But I really was using them synonymously.

I've spent a lot of time in red states, and I can say that red necks are not stupid. That's a myth promulgated by the media. They have a limited information base, in terms of what newspapers and radio they consume.

We can't convince them unless we respect them and understand where they're coming from. I do a lot of internet debate. It's not about convincing the guy you're arguing with. It's about influencing the readers. I think letting some guy make a fool of himself ranting and lying and then just calmly, cogently, and factually responding has an effect over time.

Any condescension at all only allows them to dismiss us as birkenstock-wearing latte-guzzling chardonnay swirlers off in a privileged la la land.

Bush's Dumb Act was a very effective piece of propaganda. Every time we snickered at his malapropisms it only made the rednecks identify with him more, so they couldn't recognize the silver-spoon Andover Yalie for what he was.

"It's not about convincing the guy you're arguing with. It's about influencing the readers. I think letting some guy make a fool of himself ranting and lying and then just calmly, cogently, and factually responding has an effect over time."

Last edited Tue Oct 29, 2013, 03:17 PM - Edit history (1)

You can't just give an address on TV. The rednecks won't watch it. They'll judge it through
the filter of lies they hear on TV.

Is 26% of the American electorate so important that we have to destroy what, 50% - 60% approval
just so we can please this group of people from the right that hates all things equal?

26% that will never vote democrats, the only reason were talking about them is because the media
has given them microphone to espouse their hatred, right?

but it still exists. Between the Senate and electoral college, and the drawing of House districts, they are over-represented, and we can't change that for another 8 years.

as others have pointed out, is it worth wasting resources on a small percentage of
electorate that we all know will never vote for a democratic candidate? If it's not
then it's not a solid strategy.

With regards to them being over-represented in some constituents, our goal should
be the independents in those constituency. One thing I believe the republicans did
not account for when doing their gerrymandering was being able to account for independents
in those districts.

Conservatives do not travel as much as liberals but I think another factor is libersls read more about the world, history of countries and like trying new food and connecting with the people the visit.

My brother and I are an example. I have been 75 percent deaf since an infant. The library was my friend soI read my way around the world, past, present and future without actually travelling. My brother with perfect hearing is interested in only sports. He is proud to not know anything of the world or its leaders or the history of other countries.

I am a liberal progressive.
He is a racist tea party Reagan lover. He hates Obama and thinks Sean Hannity should be president. I now live in Canada happily.
I have been all over the USA, Canada, Mexico, Caribbean and Ireland and UK.


PS: I looked at your journal and enjoyed your pictures. Beautiful.

Corporations continue to abuse the system to the tune of BILLIONS.

Why can they not see that?

why place a band-aid on something that requires Major Surgery?

I'm sure racism plays a role, but it's more complicated than that. I've seen people go off on EBT users in a pretty much colorblind way.

I've had a tiny bit of traction from the purely amoral economic argument. When the economy is in trouble, it makes more sense to give money to people who will spend it than those who won't - regardless of the recipients moral fitness.

I don't think poorer whites get much more sympathy

What do they say? We hate in others that which we hate most about ourselves.

I think it's a self-destructive cycle. They deflect and externalize the 40 years of hate directed at them by redirecting it at other people just like them.

"One is never angrier than at those one has harmed."

An incentivised and compelling (or compelled) program for lower middle class twenty-somethings to live or travel in places that will de-program them. A LARGE program that could affect many of them.

This could be run out of the State Department.

As you posit, the antidote to ignorance here is travel.

Peace Corps was made for a different kind of young person than the OP describes.

Obama's already done it once. He simultaneously gave people something they needed from the government and fixed it so that the Republicans took away government services in the shutdown. It was a political teachable moment.

I can only offer a broad strokes solution to the problem: deliver the goods. As I recall in A People's History of the United States Zinn says that the success of the American experiment is not that it is just or fair, but that it is designed to pay off people to keep them from rebelling. If that holds true, the best way is to cut taxes to the petit bourgeoises, since that is the socioeconomic class of most Tea Party members. Pay them off and you will steal the Republicans primary support.

Remember, economic class lines cut across cultural and political strata. I suspect, although I can't prove it, that there are just as many liberal as conservative petit bourgeoisis. The difference is that when you give liberals economic power they are somewhat more likely to use it in more socially beneficial ways.

Is it the same as Limbaugh's audience? Beck's? Fox?

Car dealership owner, you say. I just don't know.

but I think it would be great to structure incentives to get them to hire people rather than try to behave like billionaires and hide money from the government. That way money runs through them to other people that need it and gives them power and prestige in the community. I haven't looked at ACA that carefully yet, but it should give small business help by reducing overhead from health care costs. Pay people to invest in the community instead of dodgy hedge funds. Close the playground for the super rich and those that aspire to them will have to find another way to prosper.

There are problems with that approach though. For example, small business owners will face regulation and oversight from a more socially active liberal agenda, which is anathema to many of them. I don't know any way around that. I'm sure gains will be slow in coming. After the collapse of Communism the political left has struggled for legitimacy. The right has the bulk of the crazies because they have been on an unimpeded tear for thirty years.

My conservative friends are even re-examining the Reagan era, and are angry that even then the government grew as a part of GDP.

That said, if that epistemic closure is breaking, maybe before too long they'll notice that Obama was the smallest-government President since Eisenhower.

I've never had any doubt that significant socioeconomic change is coming. The only question was how and how much. As exigent circumstances close in around us, the left will regain legitimacy just like it has always done. I just wish we could do it before the shit totally hits the fan for once.

It would help a lot if both sides weren't so heavily invested in the culture wars, which only benefits the 1%.

We're who the people call when stuff needs to be fixed. It's just how it goes.

companies for violations of regulation and go easy on the smaller ones. That would play right into their resentments, since they are sure the only reason they aren't the biggest and most successful company is the government regulating them.

I work with them. They are stupid and mean. It's not only people of color they go after, it's anyone who doesn't fit the ideal of "normal" for them. They are rude, ignorant, and don't know how to deal with the public. I've worked with people who love to brag that they are not "big readers" (except for their Bible), they hate computers (but are forced to work with them), state that women who get pregnant after unmarried sex are "paying for their sin," and are generally proud of their ignorance. If you are of normal intelligence, you don't blame some random African American or Mexican family for the fact that you have a shitty job, can't pay your bills and have an otherwise miserable life.
The times I have visited Chicago I generally meet lovely people no matter where I go. I'm sure they have the same type of shitty life or worse. No, these people are just stupid and have horribly misplaced anger.

That describes this perfectly.

They tend to be resentful-- and with good reason. Lower middle class whites, like everyone else in the working class, have been sold out hard on the national level by the entire political establishment for several decades. They're broke and they're overworked and they're unhappy.

Conservatives offer them a narrative that goes something like, "you are the salt of the earth; the Real America, and you would be on top right now if not for these minorities, gays, college-educated liberals, etc." It gives them a phony scapegoat-- and that scapegoat is often brown.

nt

Here's a hint: They're not.

They aren't the ones making the laws-or interpreting them so that money="free speech." They aren't the ones lobbying both parties aggressively for "entitlement reform"-to the tune of tens of millions of dollars from Wall Street. They aren't the ones who elected Ronald Reagan, by and large (on average Reagan voters were wealthier than the general public). They aren't the ones who invaded foreign countries for the purposes of war profiteering. They aren't the ones who legitimized said wars in "respectable' mainstream magazines like the New York Times and the Washington Post. They aren't the ones who continue to wage war (but with a "light footprint"!) on "terrorism" via drone strikes and torture of "enemy combatants." They aren't the ones in charge of the corporate mass media brainwashing machine, which includes FOX News and talk radio (but is not limited to them).

Who owns the wealth, power, resources in this country? Not lower-status whites-not lower-status anyone, for that matter. The people who are really in charge are wealthy and disproportionately college-educated-far from a "working-class" background! The right-wing movement would be NOTHING without the patronage of billionaires like the Koch family, the Hunt family, and Richard Mellon Scaife, to name a few; take away the money, you take away the movement. That's how American politics works, especially nowadays...

All of this fixation with lower-status whites comes from voting. Yet I'm not convinced that voting alone is anywhere near the most important aspect of American politics. The bigoted attitudes and belief systems come from social conditioning, which is something anyone with even a passing knowledge of social science can tell you.

Maybe liberals are so fixated with downscale whites because, convinced of their own moral and rational superiority, they can't imagine why some poor people don't appreciate being lectured about their "stupidity" or "bigotry" for "voting against their best interests." Perhaps it makes more sense to blame the Right on less-educated rural "rednecks" because doing so externalizes any culpability for the failure of liberalism-as it is practiced in the U.S.-that educated, affluent liberals might have.

And finally, maybe it's also true that a lot of liberals prefer to blame the white "underclass" for their problems because blaming the REAL culprits would hit too close to home for many liberals, in terms of demographics, who has influence, and how the system is structured (who really benefits, who doesn't.)

"Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still." - Dale Carnegie

travel, but that they are less inclined to, and when they do, they usually do so inside a protective bubble, which they carry around the way a snail carries its home around with it, that protects them from them experiencing anything of the actual character of the country they are visiting. (Even when they travel here in the US, they want their RVs so it can be just like home, or they insist on the comforting sameness of a McDonald's, an Appleby's, or a Holiday Inn. In fact, that is why those brands were so successful in the first place--they promised that travelers would have no surprises, that everything would be the same, no matter where they had to go.)

If for some reason they are forced to travel without that protective bubble, they have a miserable and often frightening experience that causes them to feel even more revulsion against "foreigners" and against the way "those foreigners" act and live.

Occasionally, though, a conservative who is forced to visit another country without the protective bubble has an experience actually turns out to be eye-opening--but that happens only to those whose eyes aren't squeezed too desperately shut. If that happens, the erstwhile conservative returns to his home significantly more liberal than when he or she left.

but here's the rub. I'm all for trying to persuade but I'm unconvinced that it's possible. These folks need an enemy and their racism provides the perfect one.

Yes, keep trying. Dean had it right with the 50 state strategy, but think how much more polarized we are now than even 10 years ago.

I don't have high hopes.

We can't pretend they aren't being TOLD THAT by authority figures they trust.