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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Awsi Dooger

(14,565 posts)
44. Rurals will react to a bullshitter white male who partially deflects their fear
Fri Dec 15, 2017, 09:06 PM
Dec 2017

That's the best way I can put it. I've known dozens of displaced southern rural white males who moved to Las Vegas to gamble because there was not much going on in their home town. They are all conservative and scared of everything. Fear is the overwhelming trait whenever I speak to them at length. This goes back to 1984. They are scared of blacks, scared of their guns being taken away, scared of Democrats raising taxes that they don't pay, and scared of government even though they couldn't tell you why.

Since Republicans own all the fear categories they think of Democrats as people to hate and distrust. I can't count how many times those guys reacted in disbelief when they found out I was a Democrat. It was like they had never met one before. When we started to talk politics they would say taxes and government and assume that would win any argument, that no other words were ever necessary.

Once in a while we'd talk at length and they'd concede there was an occasional Democrat they didn't despise. John F. Kennedy was light years atop that category. Somehow all of them knew he had lowered taxes. I never understood if they got that from school or family members or media, or elsewhere. They all knew it even if most of them were too young to have followed Kennedy's presidency. Consequently many of those southern rural guys told me, "Kennedy was the last good Democrat," or words to that effect.

They didn't fully hate Bill Clinton. I have to say that. They assumed Bush would win but the animosity toward Clinton was not close to the level I heard in prior or subsequent cycles.

Hillary Clinton was exactly the opposite. I always thought Hillary was likely to lose a close election in 2016, solely due to the overpowering hatred toward her from those rural males I knew from Las Vegas. Guys I hadn't heard from in years were calling or emailing me, mostly to turn the conversation to politics so they could rant against Hillary. Somehow she exploded the fear like no one else. Only when Republicans nominated Trump did I think Hillary might narrowly escape.

Those guys are so simplistic I don't think getting out among them will mean a damn thing. Republicans are great at parading some new fear term. Now it's elitism. So that will have a long shelf life.

I lived in las Vegas for 25 years. Countless statewide races have been lost in that state via some genius politician thinking he/she had to get out into the rural cow counties as opposed to simply prioritizing Clark County, where the votes are. Dina Titus versus Jim Gibbons would be a highlight example. The strategy described in the OP may be acceptable for small rural races only.

Those rurals will continue to be scared of females in high places. Roy Moore would have defeated any female. I hope we don't lose sight of that basic reality. You could have attached every Doug Jones speech and accomplishment to a female of identical caliber and no way she wins that race.

IMO our best option is to artificially steal a few vital percent here and there by nominating white males who look the part and speak plenty of basic language and patriotic stuff. It may not be fully satisfying but we won't lose any frustrated voters on our side, the ones who might prefer a strong female, but you will often swipe a crucial percent or two from the other side.

Jones won but I hope we don't ignore two aspects:

* He won very narrowly. So many of these races are exceptionally tight

* We won't win our share of the tight races if our split of the white vote remains where it is, let alone if it continues to slide

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Is this another 'we need to reach out to the angry trump voter' lectures Fullduplexxx Dec 2017 #1
I would have no problem reaching out but they don't want to reach out to us, they don't Kirk Lover Dec 2017 #3
Not really. The rural poor have logical reasons to vote for us. moriah Dec 2017 #12
Rural areas need liberal radio and better internet services. Sophia4 Dec 2017 #21
The best way to put it is "a little bit is better than nothing." Willie Pep Dec 2017 #32
I did not get that from what the Senator wrote. Blue_true Dec 2017 #14
I heard john fugelsang say the same thing he said Democrats always use big words Fullduplexxx Dec 2017 #18
Exactly Butterflylady Dec 2017 #26
Are you saying that Democratic voters are better educated than Republican ones? Sophia4 Dec 2017 #22
What I am saying is that you have to use language that people understand. Blue_true Dec 2017 #24
I'm retired. I pretty much wrote for a living (not by my choice). Sophia4 Dec 2017 #27
Colbert comment on Trump's erudition NobodyInParticular Dec 2017 #31
I have two published novels, I have written hundreds of engineering reports. Blue_true Dec 2017 #35
Communication is a two-way street. Sophia4 Dec 2017 #36
Trump is a moron. Blue_true Dec 2017 #40
In my experience, it is best to personally meet and talk voters like the waitress you describe Sophia4 Dec 2017 #41
Let me try again, I was snappy on the last response. Blue_true Dec 2017 #38
Clarity is the key. Defining words that may be misunderstood by the audience Sophia4 Dec 2017 #39
I hate the elitism 'brand'...it's so not true...most of us are working slobs. n/t Kirk Lover Dec 2017 #2
And who is this guy kidding the Republicans are the most elitist group in the bunch and these rural Fullduplexxx Dec 2017 #5
Don't care about Jspur Dec 2017 #4
Look around...it's already happening... Wounded Bear Dec 2017 #6
What a waste of time... tenderfoot Dec 2017 #7
To Hell with that. And to Hell with them. Aristus Dec 2017 #8
Democrats have always given rural voters reasons to vote blue. Rural voters simply rejected them. LonePirate Dec 2017 #9
Got it in one gratuitous Dec 2017 #16
This message was self-deleted by its author moriah Dec 2017 #10
more assistance for people who hate it when other people get assistance lol. coal subsidy, farm msongs Dec 2017 #11
I think rural voters are butt-hurt because reality does not live up to the nationalist hype. DetlefK Dec 2017 #13
Rural voters, that is, voters in less populated states, pick the president. Sophia4 Dec 2017 #23
If I find that haystack needle reasonable rural conservative out there, then fine. HughBeaumont Dec 2017 #15
If one were to read Charles Pierce's eyewitness account of Moore's election eve rally one would Fred Sanders Dec 2017 #20
"Rural voters are our base." Garrett78 Dec 2017 #17
We've been giving these rural voters GREAT reasons to trust & support Dems.They don't want to listen kydo Dec 2017 #19
What do Repugs do to "Give rural voters a reason to trust and support the party"? SharonClark Dec 2017 #25
They hate the same people NT Adrahil Dec 2017 #37
Question NCDem777 Dec 2017 #28
You can talk all you want . . . hatrack Dec 2017 #29
Great stuff, thanks for posting! MiltonBrown Dec 2017 #30
I have relatives who live in rural Louisiana and they are hardcore liberal Democrats. Willie Pep Dec 2017 #34
They already have that treestar Dec 2017 #33
I've got no problem giving them a reason to vote Dem Bradical79 Dec 2017 #42
Link for full article w/ background, added information and worth reading. appalachiablue Dec 2017 #43
Rurals will react to a bullshitter white male who partially deflects their fear Awsi Dooger Dec 2017 #44
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Democrats: Give rural vot...»Reply #44