Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
19. So now you're accusing the truth of being bigoted.
Fri Sep 20, 2013, 06:08 PM
Sep 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Democrat

Reagan Democrat is an American political term used by analysts to denote traditionally Democratic voters, especially white working-class Northerners, who defected from their party to support Republican President Ronald Reagan in both the 1980 and 1984 elections. It is also used to refer to the smaller but still substantial number of Democrats who voted for George H. W. Bush in the 1988 election.

The term can also be used to describe moderate Democrats who are more conservative than liberal on certain issues like national security and immigration. The term Reagan Democrat also refers to the vast sway that Reagan held over the House of Representatives during his presidency, even though the house had a Democratic majority during both of his terms.[1] The term also hearkens back to Richard Nixon's Silent Majority; a concept that Ronald Reagan himself used during his political campaigns in the 1970s.

The work of Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg is a classic study of Reagan Democrats. Greenberg analyzed white ethnic voters (largely unionized auto workers) in Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for John F. Kennedy in 1960, but 66 percent for Reagan in 1980. He concluded that "Reagan Democrats" no longer saw Democrats as champions of their working class aspirations, but instead saw them as working primarily for the benefit of others: the very poor, feminists, the unemployed, African Americans, Latinos, and other groups. In addition, Reagan Democrats enjoyed gains during the period of economic prosperity that coincided with the Reagan administration following the "malaise" of the Carter administration. They also supported Reagan's strong stance on national security and opposed the 1980s Democratic Party on such issues as pornography, crime, and high taxes.[1]

Greenberg periodically revisited the voters of Macomb County as a barometer of public opinion until he conducted a 2008 exit poll
Why did you start your own thread on this? enlightenment Sep 2013 #1
Did you object to the thread where they called for banning anyone who favors geek tragedy Sep 2013 #4
No, why would I? That was the original thread on the topic, as far as I know. enlightenment Sep 2013 #9
There was another thread calling it Orwellian and a threat to freedom etc. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #10
I'm aware of the thread. I had just been reading it enlightenment Sep 2013 #11
The Orwellian thread person is merely confused. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #12
Look, I'm really not into enlightenment Sep 2013 #13
To dispute baseless hysteria? Something that should be done sufrommich Sep 2013 #24
I disagree. enlightenment Sep 2013 #28
I'm a bit confused by the OP title 1000words Sep 2013 #2
DU is not solely comprised of progressives. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #3
Majority are progressive. Minority are Reagan Democrats leftstreet Sep 2013 #5
Reagan Democrats are socially conservative, old, white, uneducated. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #8
Wrong. What a bigoted thing to say leftstreet Sep 2013 #18
So now you're accusing the truth of being bigoted. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #19
Was that point going to be lost on the not-so progressive members of DU? 1000words Sep 2013 #6
Says a lot, doesn't it? LondonReign2 Sep 2013 #25
Don't spoil their fun! Whisp Sep 2013 #7
This Shield Law is NOT all good... FirstLight Sep 2013 #14
Your last sentence is paranoid nonsense. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #15
i never said anything about gulags FirstLight Sep 2013 #16
The bill extends freedom of the press, it doesn't restrict it. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #17
Charles P. Pierce begs to differ. WilliamPitt Sep 2013 #20
I'll take legal analysis and history over his conspiracy theory. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #21
Most of your "rebuttal" is character assassination 1000words Sep 2013 #22
Pierce's article is basically character assassination geek tragedy Sep 2013 #23
Well, think of it like other laws designed to limit the scope of other amendments The Straight Story Sep 2013 #33
Silly me, I thought the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution WAS the "shield law". scarletwoman Sep 2013 #26
The first amendment doesn't protect journalists geek tragedy Sep 2013 #27
Twisted logic. If someone wants to talk to a journalist, the journalist has the right to print scarletwoman Sep 2013 #29
That is reality as it exists today. Doesn't make geek tragedy Sep 2013 #31
I'm opposed to this law; I think it will do more harm than good. alarimer Sep 2013 #30
Since 1896, when the first shield law was passed. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #32
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Dear DU progressives: jo...»Reply #19