TrixRabbi posted:

Another piece of it is that liberal trends, both culturally and politically, are driven from the media and personalities coming out of the major cities (mostly New York), meaning you have a group of influencers who have likely grown up upper or upper-middle class and urban, and who have been trained to look down on poor rural communities as hicks through decades of classism, media stereotypes, and insider Democrat groupthink. They themselves are a dangerously small group with immense power to alter the narrative, which is how you end up with insanity like Hamilton being the most important cultural moment of the year (that almost nobody has been able to actually see) and Lena Dunham being thought of as a valuable surrogate with a wide fanbase -- poo poo that could only come from the most insulated people with no sense for the outside world at all.

While a big part of it is denying responsibility for the Democrats (and Queen Hillary's) inability to appeal to voters, it's also this sense of betrayal. I feel like a lot of liberals earnestly don't understand how people could look at Hillary and not like her, or how they could look at the Democratic platform and be against it. It's very much a "if you don't like us, then gently caress you" attitude. As much of a role as misogyny and racism did actually play in the election, they will chock it all up to that, call Trump's victory inevitable, and use that as an excuse to write off every single person who voted for him as unforgivable bigots instead of people with actual complex opinions and struggles.

Main Paineframe posted:

Yeah, why couldn't Obama have made a simple change that solely benefited the poor, like massively expanding Medicaid eligibility? Or infrastructure spending as economic stimulus? The joke, of course, is that he did attempt both those things, among many other policies that would have helped poor whites, but both were blocked by both state and national Republicans in the name of their ideological opposition to government programs that help poor people.

It's true that those groups' support for Dems dropped off about fifty years ago, particularly in the South...but that happens during the very height of LBJ's Great Society and his War on Poverty, when American poverty rates were dropping at unprecedented speeds (at least until Nixon dismantled key anti-poverty programs).

The narrative of liberal elitists laughing at poor rural whites from afar while doing nothing to help them is certainly a common one, but it's hard to square that with the actual facts. On the other hand, it sure bears an uncanny resemblance to cultural resentment of Northeastern elites that the South has held since before the Civil War!

Thoguh posted:

Main Paineframe posted:

little did they know that when LBJ declared a War on Poverty, what he actually meant was a war on poor people

Main Paineframe posted:

the Dems tried to expand Medicare and spend money on infrastructure and poo poo

Republicans blocked it because they are ideologically opposed to helping the poor

no one cares, though, so LIBERALS LIBERALS LIBERALS LIBERALS LIBERALS LIBERALS

Jeb! Repetition posted:

Anyway, liberals who hate the poor do so because they accepted the 2000s era culture war framing where it was poor rural vs rich urban.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

Dem efforts are all compromised half-measures though. Like when Clinton wanted to expand Medicare - to 50 year olds.

wizard on a water slide posted:

^^^

also re: the op the reason I still vote for democrats to defeat republicans even though they're lovely fake leftists is because democrats for the most part aren't interested in legislation that explicitly oppresses me on the basis of my identity on top of everything else

I hope that is ideologically acceptable

mysterious frankie posted:

...I'm guessing you probably don't want to high five now? I'll just... put my hand down.

Top City Homo posted:

liberalism embraces cargo cult scientism as a way to justify status quo capitalism and "human nature" by shutting out dissent to alternative forms of social organization

its cyclical failure through myopia to any values serves as the petri dish for fascism