Bill Maher is spot on imo on all fronts here

[twenty02]

Wrong. You’re talking about swing voters. I’m talking about the base. The base has changed. A swing voter can go either way in a given election. Hell I’m a swing voter. The working class as I linked has realigned itself. They are the base. They are maga. That’s not a swing voter. That’s the party. Not sure why you refuse to grasp that. I don’t think you understand today’s Republican Party.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/10/09/republican-working-class-chaos/

Working Class Folks are the New Political Base and Republicans Have the Advantage | The Ripon Society

The GOP's new voters need relief from both government and the private sector.

riponsociety.org

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-gops-big-working-class-bet/

This is all in keeping with the thrust of bill Maher’s assertion re Trumpism. - that trump will go but Trumpism will still be around. This is the Republican Party. Not fickle swing voters - the base.

I don't buy it because the numbers don't back it up. There were 13% that voted for Obama in 2012 but switched and voted Trump in 2016. (And of course some Romney voters that switched to Clinton, but less).

I know a ton of Republicans. And they've been loyal Republican voters for decades. And they vote for Trump because he's the Republican. It's no surprise that he got the same % of the vote that Romney did...
These are people that will vote for the Republican nominee regardless of who it is. They will also all change messaging of what's important to them based upon whomever the GOP nominee is. I've seen it constantly. No different than loyal Dem voters.

The top of the ticket has changed messaging because of Trump sure. But also understand he needs those populist types to win a national election. These are basically rural, white voters with the lowest education achievement... And some of them switched from voting Obama to Trump in places like rural Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. But it's 23% of the party, according to Pew, and I'd say half of them are right learning regardless. But it is NOT the base. It's just a slightly different coalition than what the Romney/Bush types went after.

The true base are the 40% in that 'Faith and Flag' and 'Committed Conservative' bloc.... Those are people that will vote every single cycle, including primaries. And they are always going to vote Republican. Every time. Not the same could be said by these fickle populist types.

 

[twenty02]

No, the Faith and Flag people are the most loyal voters, they don't run the party though. The Committed Conservatives do...at least in messaging (after the past few years I question a whole bunch of the party leaderships actual commitment to conservatism, but that is where their rhetoric generally is).

With Trump, the Populists are running the messaging and they have an easier time in drawing in some of those moderate Democrats because they are much more willing to tack left on economic issues. The real danger is that we haven't had a true conservative governing party at the Federal level in a long time because that is hard to do. We have had the let's go left and the let's go left but not as fast party. That is what led to Trump. Which is why I disagree with Aloha about kicking all the Trump elements out of the party. The voters want a more throaty defense of their beliefs AND they expect to see some action when the GOP has some power. Otherwise we are on the path to Europe where the "conservatives" are people like Trump, namely what used to be Democrats here about 30 years ago.

By run they party, I only mean they have the biggest bloc in primary elections and are the most loyal Republican voter. Bad wording.

 

[mcmurtry66]

No, the Faith and Flag people are the most loyal voters, they don't run the party though. The Committed Conservatives do...at least in messaging (after the past few years I question a whole bunch of the party leaderships actual commitment to conservatism, but that is where their rhetoric generally is).

With Trump, the Populists are running the messaging and they have an easier time in drawing in some of those moderate Democrats because they are much more willing to tack left on economic issues. The real danger is that we haven't had a true conservative governing party at the Federal level in a long time because that is hard to do. We have had the let's go left and the let's go left but not as fast party. That is what led to Trump. Which is why I disagree with Aloha about kicking all the Trump elements out of the party. The voters want a more throaty defense of their beliefs AND they expect to see some action when the GOP has some power. Otherwise we are on the path to Europe where the "conservatives" are people like Trump, namely what used to be Democrats here about 30 years ago.

I don't buy it because the numbers don't back it up. There were 13% that voted for Obama in 2012 but switched and voted Trump in 2016. (And of course some Romney voters that switched to Clinton, but less).

I know a ton of Republicans. And they've been loyal Republican voters for decades. And they vote for Trump because he's the Republican. It's no surprise that he got the same % of the vote that Romney did...
These are people that will vote for the Republican nominee regardless of who it is. They will also all change messaging of what's important to them based upon whomever the GOP nominee is. I've seen it constantly. No different than loyal Dem voters.

The top of the ticket has changed messaging because of Trump sure. But also understand he needs those populist types to win a national election. These are basically rural, white voters with the lowest education achievement... And some of them switched from voting Obama to Trump in places like rural Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. But it's 23% of the party, according to Pew, and I'd say half of them are right learning regardless. But it is NOT the base. It's just a slightly different coalition than what the Romney/Bush types went after.

The true base are the 40% in that 'Faith and Flag' and 'Committed Conservative' bloc.... Those are people that will vote every single cycle, including primaries. And they are always going to vote Republican. Every time. Not the same could be said by these fickle populist types.

yeah i disagree with your labeling. as i said and as set forth in the articles the base has changed for the republican party to primarily working class voters. the base has also changed with the dem party. i think there has been more movement than you are willing to acknowledge as i don't think it's the fringes. i think it's deeper.

 

[dbmhoosier]

Amazing.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Trumps only view is winning. The “everything is fine just continue to follow the cabal, who moved my cheese ” crowd will say he’s only interested in winning for himself. Fine if you want to continue to simply be led by the nose, and ignore that it’s leading us into oblivion. But Trump has nothing in this to win for himself. Jesus Christ, dems have tried to kill him. twice!
If it were any other country, we’d be sending in the CIA to stop this crap. But here we are, with our own CIA and swamp donkeys doing what they do, to ourselves!

Totally irresponsible.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I don't buy it because the numbers don't back it up. There were 13% that voted for Obama in 2012 but switched and voted Trump in 2016. (And of course some Romney voters that switched to Clinton, but less).

I know a ton of Republicans. And they've been loyal Republican voters for decades. And they vote for Trump because he's the Republican. It's no surprise that he got the same % of the vote that Romney did...
These are people that will vote for the Republican nominee regardless of who it is. They will also all change messaging of what's important to them based upon whomever the GOP nominee is. I've seen it constantly. No different than loyal Dem voters.

The top of the ticket has changed messaging because of Trump sure. But also understand he needs those populist types to win a national election. These are basically rural, white voters with the lowest education achievement... And some of them switched from voting Obama to Trump in places like rural Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. But it's 23% of the party, according to Pew, and I'd say half of them are right learning regardless. But it is NOT the base. It's just a slightly different coalition than what the Romney/Bush types went after.

The true base are the 40% in that 'Faith and Flag' and 'Committed Conservative' bloc.... Those are people that will vote every single cycle, including primaries. And they are always going to vote Republican. Every time. Not the same could be said by these fickle populist types.

I fit the committed conservative profile. As it says, not all will vote for Trump. I’m one of those that won’t.

 

[dbmhoosier]

Totally irresponsible.

Did you see the poll where over 1 in 4 Dems say they wish he had been killed?

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Amazing.

View embedded media

Amazing? You mean it’s amazing that Trump is a perpetually immature whining loser? That is amazing.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Did you see the poll where over 1 in 4 Dems say they wish he had been killed?

Link it. I bet you haven’t seen it and all you know about any poll is what a Tiny-brained Trumpster Twitter Twit told you to “think” about it. My guess without seeing it is that a percentage of them wouldn’t be terribly upset if he died - sort of like you should Nancy Pelosi died.

 

[hoot1]

Did you see the poll where over 1 in 4 Dems say they wish he had been killed?

Here is a link showing a poll whereby 28% of the Dems polled wished Trump had been assassinated.

Sad commentary on today's politics.

These Dems should be ashamed of themselves..

Poll: 28% of Democrats say U.S. better off if Trump were assassinated

(The Center Square) – More than a quarter of Democrats in a new poll said America would be better off if former President Donald Trump had been killed in Sunday's

www.news-shield.com

 

[dbmhoosier]

Link it. I bet you haven’t seen it and all you know about any poll is what a Tiny-brained Trumpster Twitter Twit told you to “think” about it. My guess without seeing it is that a percentage of them wouldn’t be terribly upset if he died - sort of like you should Nancy Pelosi died.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Here is a link showing a poll whereby 28% of the Dems polled wished Trump had been assassinated.

Sad commentary on today's politics.

These Dems should be ashamed of themselves..

Poll: 28% of Democrats say U.S. better off if Trump were assassinated

(The Center Square) – More than a quarter of Democrats in a new poll said America would be better off if former President Donald Trump had been killed in Sunday's

www.news-shield.com

I'm surprised it's that much, but not that some percentage would be good with it. It's the growing incivility in this country and that many don't see the "other side" as fellow Americans with differing ideas about how to improve it, but as enemies. It's a dangerous trend.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Totally irresponsible.

With all due respect. You can not have a respected honest comment due to your total partisan hatred, sir. With all due respect.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Here is a link showing a poll whereby 28% of the Dems polled wished Trump had been assassinated.

Sad commentary on today's politics.

These Dems should be ashamed of themselves..

Poll: 28% of Democrats say U.S. better off if Trump were assassinated

(The Center Square) – More than a quarter of Democrats in a new poll said America would be better off if former President Donald Trump had been killed in Sunday's

www.news-shield.com

I was fishing with my neighbor, who I absolutely love BTW. During the trip, news broke about the bombs on long island and I said "OMG they tried to kill Trump for the 3rd time". First words out of her mouth.. "they missed again?"
I still lover her and her husband, but we agreed to not talk politics.

 

[mcmurtry66]

I was fishing with my neighbor, who I absolutely love BTW. During the trip, news broke about the bombs on long island and I said "OMG they tried to kill Trump for the 3rd time". First words out of her mouth.. "they missed again?"
I still lover her and her husband, but we agreed to not talk politics.

great. no one cares. so. what's your read on the situation? he done with her? a marriage of convenience at this point? is there an angle here?

 

[dr.jb]

I was fishing with my neighbor, who I absolutely love BTW. During the trip, news broke about the bombs on long island and I said "OMG they tried to kill Trump for the 3rd time". First words out of her mouth.. "they missed again?"
I still lover her and her husband, but we agreed to not talk politics.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

With all due respect. You can not have a respected honest comment due to your total partisan hatred, sir. With all due respect.

Blaming fellow Americans for attempted murder with zero evidence they were involved deserves no respect. Try to do better.

 

[hoot1]

I was fishing with my neighbor, who I absolutely love BTW. During the trip, news broke about the bombs on long island and I said "OMG they tried to kill Trump for the 3rd time". First words out of her mouth.. "they missed again?"
I still lover her and her husband, but we agreed to not talk politics.

Joe, good for you. Friendship is way more important than politics.

My parents expressed similar sentiments when hearing about the death of FDR. Needless to say, they took their politics seriously. I did wear a Dewey button to grade school. However, no yard signs or campaign buttons these days.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Here is a link showing a poll whereby 28% of the Dems polled wished Trump had been assassinated.

Sad commentary on today's politics.

These Dems should be ashamed of themselves..

Poll: 28% of Democrats say U.S. better off if Trump were assassinated

(The Center Square) – More than a quarter of Democrats in a new poll said America would be better off if former President Donald Trump had been killed in Sunday's

www.news-shield.com

The wording is important in that poll.

 

[hoot1]

The wording is important in that poll.

For sure.

A telephone poll questioner recently asked me, "If you found out (name of mayoral candidate) had a drinking problem and will divorce his wife, would you vote for him? ".

 

[Baller23Boogie]

For sure.

A telephone poll questioner recently asked me, "If you found out (name of mayoral candidate) had a drinking problem and will divorce his wife, would you vote for him? ".

We all know how you answered that made up scenario, you party animal!

 

[hoot1]

We all know how you answered that made up scenario, you party animal!

Got me.

Voted for the drunk"a opponent who promised free city leaf pickup for leaves raked onto the streets.

Did so knowing the drunk would win while at the same championing the restoration of the city sweeping our streets as it once did.

P.S. Didn't make up the push pull poll except for the part about it being recent.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

For sure.

A telephone poll questioner recently asked me, "If you found out (name of mayoral candidate) had a drinking problem and will divorce his wife, would you vote for him? ".

I mean specifically they asked if the country would be better off if he were killed, not whether the respondents actually wanted it to happen. It's a much easier question to say yes to, because you can tell yourself you recognize that he's dangerous without actually wishing him ill.

(Granted, some number of the respondents absolutely wish him ill, no question.)

 

[DANC]

The wording is important in that poll.

Wording is important in any poll.

 

[UncleMark]

I mean specifically they asked if the country would be better off if he were killed...

That would be an interesting discussion topic, but it would go to shit in about three posts.

 

[DANC]

That would be an interesting discussion topic, but it would go to shit in about three posts.

As well it should.

 

[Digressions]

yeah i disagree with your labeling. as i said and as set forth in the articles the base has changed for the republican party to primarily working class voters. the base has also changed with the dem party. i think there has been more movement than you are willing to acknowledge as i don't think it's the fringes. i think it's deeper.

What percent of the country isn't "working class"?

Reagan/conservatism came back to power because of a coalition built with the faith and flag/god and guns folk. They necessarily voted against their own economic interests for decades, and they didn't like the results. Trump has given them an economic voice.

 

[mcmurtry66]

What percent of the country isn't "working class"?

Reagan/conservatism came back to power because of a coalition built with the faith and flag/god and guns folk. They necessarily voted against their own economic interests for decades, and they didn't like the results. Trump has given them an economic voice.

That’s a tough one but from my half-assed research about 45% are the working class

 

[Digressions]

That’s a tough one but from my half-assed research about 45% are the working class

Of the total population? I guess I'm asking for the definition.

 

[BradStevens]

yeah i disagree with your labeling. as i said and as set forth in the articles the base has changed for the republican party to primarily working class voters. the base has also changed with the dem party. i think there has been more movement than you are willing to acknowledge as i don't think it's the fringes. i think it's deeper.

Some anecdotal evidence and an an opinion from a former Dem fundraiser:

I Raised Millions for Democrats. After Kamala's DNC, I'm Through | Opinion

The Democratic Party has lost its way. They speak to the college educated, the urban and affluent, in their language. Their tone is condescending.

www.newsweek.com

 

[mcmurtry66]

Some anecdotal evidence and an an opinion from a former Dem fundraiser:

I Raised Millions for Democrats. After Kamala's DNC, I'm Through | Opinion

The Democratic Party has lost its way. They speak to the college educated, the urban and affluent, in their language. Their tone is condescending.

www.newsweek.com

@Digressions here is some anecdotal evidence. It’s that trade type worker

I didn’t really answer your question

 

[BradStevens]

Of the total population? I guess I'm asking for the definition.

Working class in the United States​

The working class is often defined as those lacking college degrees, which is a majority of American adults.
In the United States, the concept of a working class remains vaguely defined, and classifying people or jobs into this class can be contentious. Economists and pollsters in the United States generally define "working class" adults as those lacking a college degree,[1] rather than by occupation or income. Other definitions refer to those in blue-collar occupations, despite the considerable range in required skills and income among such occupations.[2] Many members of the working class, as defined by academic models, are often identified in the vernacular as being middle-class, despite there being considerable ambiguity over the term's meaning. According to Frank Newport, "for some, working class is a more literal label; namely, an indication that one is working."[3]
Sociologists such as Dennis Gilbert and Joseph Kahl see the working class as the most populous in the United States,[4] while other sociologists such as William Thompson, Joseph Hickey and James Henslin deem the lower middle class slightly more populous.[5][6] In the class models devised by these sociologists, the working class comprises between 30% and 35% of the population, roughly the same percentages as the lower middle class. According to the class model by Dennis Gilbert, the working class comprises those between the 25th and 55th percentile of society. In 2018, 31% of Americans self described themselves as working class.[3] Retired American adults are less likely to describe themselves as "working class", regardless of the actual income or education level of the adult.[3]

 

[DANC]

Working class in the United States​

The working class is often defined as those lacking college degrees, which is a majority of American adults.
In the United States, the concept of a working class remains vaguely defined, and classifying people or jobs into this class can be contentious. Economists and pollsters in the United States generally define "working class" adults as those lacking a college degree,[1] rather than by occupation or income. Other definitions refer to those in blue-collar occupations, despite the considerable range in required skills and income among such occupations.[2] Many members of the working class, as defined by academic models, are often identified in the vernacular as being middle-class, despite there being considerable ambiguity over the term's meaning. According to Frank Newport, "for some, working class is a more literal label; namely, an indication that one is working."[3]
Sociologists such as Dennis Gilbert and Joseph Kahl see the working class as the most populous in the United States,[4] while other sociologists such as William Thompson, Joseph Hickey and James Henslin deem the lower middle class slightly more populous.[5][6] In the class models devised by these sociologists, the working class comprises between 30% and 35% of the population, roughly the same percentages as the lower middle class. According to the class model by Dennis Gilbert, the working class comprises those between the 25th and 55th percentile of society. In 2018, 31% of Americans self described themselves as working class.[3] Retired American adults are less likely to describe themselves as "working class", regardless of the actual income or education level of the adult.[3]

I have my own definition of working class: If you lose your job today, and run out of money (and saleable assets, in a year or less, with no other support, you're working class. You have to work.

That doesn't include anyone whose parents support them or who have access to other assets. Those are the privileged.

People can move in and out of 'working class' during their lives. I was working class for the vast majority of my life, but being retired and living off investments and SS, I'm probably considered more of a leisure class.

I don't think education has anything to do with it, other than you can move up to a privileged or leisure class more easily because of higher paying opportunities.

Just my own personal definition, and by that, I would say 75% of Americans are working class.

And anyone who is dependent on the government to live would be a part of the dependent class.

 

[twenty02]

@Digressions here is some anecdotal evidence. It’s that trade type worker

I didn’t really answer your question

Most of today's working class don't work skilled trade jobs. They work hourly service jobs. Food service, low level healthcare services, building services, retail, etc....

 

[mcmurtry66]

Most of today's working class don't work skilled trade jobs. They work hourly service jobs. Food service, low level healthcare services, building services, retail, etc....

That’s a good point

 

[BradStevens]

I have my own definition of working class: If you lose your job today, and run out of money (and saleable assets, in a year or less, with no other support, you're working class. You have to work.

That doesn't include anyone whose parents support them or who have access to other assets. Those are the privileged.

People can move in and out of 'working class' during their lives. I was working class for the vast majority of my life, but being retired and living off investments and SS, I'm probably considered more of a leisure class.

I don't think education has anything to do with it, other than you can move up to a privileged or leisure class more easily because of higher paying opportunities.

Just my own personal definition, and by that, I would say 75% of Americans are working class.

And anyone who is dependent on the government to live would be a part of the dependent class.

Problem with your definition is that it would include starting doctors, lawyers, and probably all university professors. I don't think that jibes with most notions of the term.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Dems have a history of promoting their failures. Just look at Biden - laughed out of the Presidential race in the late 80s for plagiarism and overstating his academic achievements and then the same media and Party embrace him as VP (where he was a joke) and Prez (where he's even more of a failure).

Also, Hillary.

 

[hoot1]

I have my own definition of working class: If you lose your job today, and run out of money (and saleable assets, in a year or less, with no other support, you're working class. You have to work.

That doesn't include anyone whose parents support them or who have access to other assets. Those are the privileged.

People can move in and out of 'working class' during their lives. I was working class for the vast majority of my life, but being retired and living off investments and SS, I'm probably considered more of a leisure class.

I don't think education has anything to do with it, other than you can move up to a privileged or leisure class more easily because of higher paying opportunities.

Just my own personal definition, and by that, I would say 75% of Americans are working class.

And anyone who is dependent on the government to live would be a part of the dependent class.

DANC, appreciated your post. However, have my on own take on being dependent and how our capitalist economic system has evolved since the industrial revolution.

In a nutshell, we all have a special role in our economy while at the same being dependent on others to make the system perform effectively in providing the goods and services we all depend upon.

Government in my view over the years has managed to support our economy and balance the interests of those who own and manage the income producing assets, and the interests of those workers who depend on owners for income along with the intetests of consumers.

We often look at the private and public sectors as being st odds with each other while forgetting they each work together to make our capitalist system work together for the vast majority.

 

[Digressions]

Maher defines it as fear of the insanity of the far left re gender, race and free speech. Extreme progressive bs.

I think it is in part that. Traditional values. Family. Etc. But imo it is also what maga tapped into. Support for cops not defunding. Gas not EVs - auto workers etc. manufacturing not coding. That blue collar nailpounder who sends his kids to catholic schools and had always been a Dem but doesn’t give a shit about tranny rights and has kids who are now priced out of the American dream

Illusory in part. They don’t fit old repubs or new Dems

I agree with Twenty. I don't think it's as prevalent as it seems.

I would like to add-anecdotally- as the middle class got squeezed, many people grew less tolerant of the dependent class. And obviously that would have shifted a percentage of D's to R's. I think that happened before Trump, but is part of what he tapped into.

EDIT: Remember Obama phones?

 

[DANC]

Problem with your definition is that it would include starting doctors, lawyers, and probably all university professors. I don't think that jibes with most notions of the term.

Why is that a problem? Don't they have to work for an income?

I don't think it makes sense to used the English 'working class' term as it applies to America. In England, if you're born into a class, you are identified with that class until you're knighted or given some honor that raises you up. That still applies today.

In America, you can be born into poverty and achieve much wealth and status. You can move between 'classes' easily.

To me, if you have to work, you're part of the working class, as I said, regardless of education level.

Try telling a beginning doctor he's not working......