PDA

View Full Version : Why do ppl in the rural areas vote for the monkey?


Navratilove
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:31 AM
I noticed in most of the big cities ppl voted for Kerry while those in the country voted for the Bibabanaboo. Any explanation I will appreciate! thx

Bacardi
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:32 AM
Hicks are stupid? Lesser educated?

Just a guess, but they don't recieve the news outlets that the rest of the larger cities do. When you are limited to a cow and a one channel satellite hookup, it's a wonder you don't vote for Dale Earnhardt JR.

Crazy Canuck
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:34 AM
Because people in urban areas are more highly evolved! ;)

Seriously, hasn't this been beaten to death? I mean, they call it the "bible belt" for a reason, right? Bush and the Republicans appeal more to certain Christians... among other reaons, I imagine.

LucasArg
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:35 AM
I was wondering the same thing...

martinafan
Nov 3rd, 2004, 07:50 AM
i would assume just the different values that those living in urban areas have as opposed to those in rural areas, and the two men up for president clearly represent the two extremes of those values.

Kerry represents all the values or urbanites - those that are more modern, and concerned about todays issues and the 21st century.
Bush represents all the values of those rural living folk, those that are stereotypically more christian and have older-day values.

But that's just my take on it, and i'm relatively a novice to us politics...being someone from australia ;)....that's just the impression i've gotten from watching the coverage of the election today for about 4-5 hours....

Navratilove
Nov 3rd, 2004, 12:15 PM
ummmm

~RedRose~
Nov 3rd, 2004, 12:29 PM
Bush represents all the values of those rural living folk, those that are stereotypically more christian and have older-day values.

It would appear that these apparently "older-day values" are still Modern day values, based on the election result.

Celeste
Nov 3rd, 2004, 12:34 PM
The Democrats ran the wrong person, people wanted to vote against Bush, but Kerry just didn't appeal to enough people. If he'd been a little more Hawkish, he might have captured more people.

Navratilove
Nov 3rd, 2004, 12:37 PM
What do you think the outcome would have been like had Edward been the cadidate from the Democrats instead of Kerry?

azmad_88
Nov 4th, 2004, 02:46 AM
California
District of Columbia
New York

all went to Kerry...

Berlin_Calling
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:17 AM
California
District of Columbia
New York

all went to Kerry...
If you are trying to say that people from the District of Columbia and New York are more highly educated therefore voted for Bush, you are wrong. The majority of D.C. is made up of poor, inner-city minorities. The politicians don't live in D.C., they all come from rich yuppie neighborhoods such as Georgetown. Same goes for New York as well.

nash
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:21 AM
Hicks are stupid? Lesser educated?

Just a guess, but they don't recieve the news outlets that the rest of the larger cities do. When you are limited to a cow and a one channel satellite hookup, it's a wonder you don't vote for Dale Earnhardt JR.You know, this has been bothering me all day long... How can the Republicans be the party of the rich AND the party of the uneducated at the same time?

I always thought the Democratic party was supposed to be the party of the poor, including inner cities, minorities, etc... How does that jive with your theory that the Republican supporters are uneducated?

BTW... I voted for Bush and I was Valedictorian of my High School class, and graduated summa cum laude in both my undergraduate and graduate college studies.

Justeenium
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:37 AM
The Democrats ran the wrong person, people wanted to vote against Bush, but Kerry just didn't appeal to enough people. If he'd been a little more Hawkish, he might have captured more people.
I think they should have gone with Lieberman.

nash
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:44 AM
Oh it doesnt matter about your past .... you see if you voted Bush your IQ dropped down to like that of a 6 yr olds the exact moment you voted .... well at least that is what Bacardi and her fellow name calling Democrats will say. :rolleyes:
:haha:

:wavey:

njguido11
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:50 AM
You know, this has been bothering me all day long... How can the Republicans be the party of the rich AND the party of the uneducated at the same time?

I always thought the Democratic party was supposed to be the party of the poor, including inner cities, minorities, etc... How does that jive with your theory that the Republican supporters are uneducated?

BTW... I voted for Bush and I was Valedictorian of my High School class, and graduated summa cum laude in both my undergraduate and graduate college studies.

Def agree the argument people have been making is completely inaccurate

cheesestix
Nov 4th, 2004, 03:56 AM
You know, this has been bothering me all day long... How can the Republicans be the party of the rich AND the party of the uneducated at the same time?

I always thought the Democratic party was supposed to be the party of the poor, including inner cities, minorities, etc... How does that jive with your theory that the Republican supporters are uneducated?

BTW... I voted for Bush and I was Valedictorian of my High School class, and graduated summa cum laude in both my undergraduate and graduate college studies.

Great post!

Just like Kerry, these people talk out of both sides of their mouths.

The obviously don't even think before speaking.

decemberlove
Nov 4th, 2004, 04:00 AM
If you are trying to say that people from the District of Columbia and New York are more highly educated therefore voted for Bush, you are wrong. The majority of D.C. is made up of poor, inner-city minorities. The politicians don't live in D.C., they all come from rich yuppie neighborhoods such as Georgetown. Same goes for New York as well.
new york is a state, remember?

it's not all "poor inner-city minorities", but nice try.

Berlin_Calling
Nov 4th, 2004, 04:02 AM
new york is a state, remember?

it's not all "poor inner-city minorities", but nice try.
umm D.C. is mostly poor inner-city minorities, yes. Posh, upperclass people do not live in D.C. And I was using D.C. as my main example, with New York having the same scenario somewhat.

decemberlove
Nov 4th, 2004, 04:13 AM
umm D.C. is mostly poor inner-city minorities, yes. Posh, upperclass people do not live in D.C. And I was using D.C. as my main example, with New York having the same scenario somewhat.
umm... did i say anything about DC?

no.

you never said NY had the same scenario somewhat... but again, nice attempt at covering your own ass when you are wrong. even if you did, the situation is NY [the state OR the city... i believe the original person was referring to the state] is nothing like DC.

i said in ys' thread that i don't believe there is a correlation between education and what party a person chooses, but i don't like when people defend their party by saying it's all minorities in that area, or all hicks in that area. there are idiots everywhere. i think this thread is proof of that. :)

ptkten
Nov 4th, 2004, 05:00 AM
um...well if you knew anything about D.C., you would know that Georgetown is a neighborhood IN DC, so don't say that all politicians and wealthy people don't actually live in DC, because there are plenty of upscale wealthy neighborhoods in DC such as Georgetown, DuPont, and Foggy Bottom.

Anyway, I find it highly offensive that you would characterize minorities as all being poor and uneducated, and that the people in DC and New York are all poor and undeducated.

Martian Jeza
Nov 4th, 2004, 05:04 AM
You know, this has been bothering me all day long... How can the Republicans be the party of the rich AND the party of the uneducated at the same time?

Great Contradiction !

BTW... I voted for Bush and I was Valedictorian of my High School class, and graduated summa cum laude in both my undergraduate and graduate college studies.

I hope you will regret your vote for Bush !

LucasArg
Nov 4th, 2004, 05:17 AM
um...well if you knew anything about D.C., you would know that Georgetown is a neighborhood IN DC, so don't say that all politicians and wealthy people don't actually live in DC, because there are plenty of upscale wealthy neighborhoods in DC such as Georgetown, DuPont, and Foggy Bottom.

Anyway, I find it highly offensive that you would characterize minorities as all being poor and uneducated, and that the people in DC and New York are all poor and undeducated.People in Manhattan are all poor?:lol:

What is clear is that in the big cities of the richiest states, people voted for Kerry and most of the rural counties people voted for Bush. See: Illinois, California, and some other not that rich states like Nevada, Florida for example.

tennispro105
Nov 4th, 2004, 05:23 AM
don't make judgements about states you've never been too! i bet half you losers think us in texas go places on horses and have no highways or interstates or anything and that it's a desert wasteland which is far from the truth!!! go to downtown dallas, houston, etc...!!!! we have a very high standard of education here! i'm not going to speak for any of the other states in the south because honestly i have no clue about them. so we probably sound like we talk a little different and slower but you guys sound funny too! you just feel more obligated to make that judgement since we're in the same country... you don't say that stuff about brits or auzzies do you? no!

you guys say we voted for bush because we're stupid... i think it's the other way around! you guys are the dumb ones! you guys will vote for kerry even though you don't like him, but you just hate bush so much you won't even consider voting for him! it's more that way than the other way around!

you guys are calling bush a monkey...

well who's the botox loser who turned orange from a spray on tan!!

Tennis Fool
Nov 4th, 2004, 05:41 AM
um...well if you knew anything about D.C., you would know that Georgetown is a neighborhood IN DC, so don't say that all politicians and wealthy people don't actually live in DC, because there are plenty of upscale wealthy neighborhoods in DC such as Georgetown, DuPont, and Foggy Bottom.

Anyway, I find it highly offensive that you would characterize minorities as all being poor and uneducated, and that the people in DC and New York are all poor and undeducated.
Yes, but most live outside of DC, and just telemute to work ;)

ex hopman
Nov 4th, 2004, 06:29 AM
One of the Japanese media explained...
People who go to church on Sundays voted for Bush...

Those people were comfortable with his "religious" ideas, they said...
and america seems to become more of religious (christian) country under bush...
he's very strong about his opinion, but he's very strict and not flexible for other people's ideas.

under his time, the policy for foreigners like myself has become more strict no matter where u were from!! :(

Go Edward!

LucasArg
Nov 4th, 2004, 07:05 AM
don't make judgements about states you've never been too! i bet half you losers think us in texas go places on horses and have no highways or interstates or anything and that it's a desert wasteland which is far from the truth!!! go to downtown dallas, houston, etc...!!!! we have a very high standard of education here! i'm not going to speak for any of the other states in the south because honestly i have no clue about them. so we probably sound like we talk a little different and slower but you guys sound funny too! you just feel more obligated to make that judgement since we're in the same country... you don't say that stuff about brits or auzzies do you? no!

you guys say we voted for bush because we're stupid... i think it's the other way around! you guys are the dumb ones! you guys will vote for kerry even though you don't like him, but you just hate bush so much you won't even consider voting for him! it's more that way than the other way around!

you guys are calling bush a monkey...

well who's the botox loser who turned orange from a spray on tan!!
In my case I was talking about what I saw in the map, between the big cities and the small ones, I don't think that someone poor is uneducated.

Sam L
Nov 4th, 2004, 11:36 AM
You know, this has been bothering me all day long... How can the Republicans be the party of the rich AND the party of the uneducated at the same time?

I always thought the Democratic party was supposed to be the party of the poor, including inner cities, minorities, etc... How does that jive with your theory that the Republican supporters are uneducated?

BTW... I voted for Bush and I was Valedictorian of my High School class, and graduated summa cum laude in both my undergraduate and graduate college studies.
Oh really? Then you should be intelligent enough to understand this.

There are a variety of groups supporting Bush for a variety of reasons.

The mega-rich do, yes. Why tax breaks? But the mega-rich are NOT the ONLY ones who vote for Bush you silly little idiot. What's the % of the American population that is mega-rich? Less than 1% I imagine. You think Bush will win with that?

Hence, he also needs the support the rural rednecks. This makes up for a very very large %.

Combine the two and he has it made.

Someone as educated as you should've figured that out.

And that's how the GOP can be a party of the rich and of the uneducated.

Gee. Do they hand out degrees easily these days? :o

Sam L
Nov 4th, 2004, 11:40 AM
Anyway, I find it highly offensive that you would characterize minorities as all being poor and uneducated, and that the people in DC and New York are all poor and undeducated.
What do you expect, people like him have [b]certain[b] opinions of minorities. You see, to them the minorities are not as good as the white Christians who go to Church every sunday. What's that word again?

Sam L
Nov 4th, 2004, 11:53 AM
Sam L It isn't like all of New York or California voted for Kerry. Bush has alot of supporters in these non-"redneck" (as you like to call them) states. Just the same as Kerry still got alot of votes in these redneck states. You make it sound like every "redneck" voted for Bush .... WRONG!

Meanwhile I would not take a swipe at nash having a degree .... you don't know him/her, you do not know how smart s/he is and what he has achieved. Your comment was cheap and uncalled for; and needless to say downright rude.
Child, I didn't call ANY state redneck. You still struggle with English don't you? :o

I said, "he also needs the support (of) the rural rednecks."

I'm talking about people here, not states. There are rural areas in states like New York and Pennsylvania too.

I implied that every redneck voted for Bush, but any intelligent person reading my post would not assume that every redneck voted for Bush. Just like they wouldn't assume every mega-rich person voted for Bush. Only an idiot would assume that. :o I'm talking in general terms here. You know like when people say conservatives vote for Bush and liberals vote for Kerry. They're not actually saying every single conservative voted for Bush.

Good grief, it's like I'm a Kindergarten teacher!

Ayla, I really should stop responding to your trollish posts, you're simply NOT on my level. :o It really wastes both of our times.

nash
Nov 4th, 2004, 02:39 PM
Hence, he also needs the support the rural rednecks. This makes up for a very very large %.
Sam L - Where are you from? I think you are confusing the terms Conservative Christian and "redneck". I'm from the deep south, and trust me, there are lots of "rednecks" who are NOT conservative Christians. I totally agree that Bush had a vast amount of support from Christians. However, "rednecks" (I assume you mean poor, rural, and uneducated people from the south) who are not Christian have almost always supported Democratic candidates. This election was no exception. Most of them supported Kerry. If cnn.com still has the state by state info posted, look at the counties in Tennessee. The rural, poor outlying counties (and inner city Nashville), were mostly won by Kerry. The suburban counties surrounding the big cities (where the mostly educated and wealthy live) were supporters of Bush by huge margins.

BTW - Are you an American?

decemberlove
Nov 4th, 2004, 09:44 PM
Yes, but most live outside of DC, and just telemute to work ;)

same with NYC, but that's cos most people can't afford to live in NYC :)

Chrispy needs to travel outside of the state of Connecticut and experience life, instead of listening to the news.

Sam L
Nov 5th, 2004, 10:45 AM
Sam L - Where are you from? I think you are confusing the terms Conservative Christian and "redneck". I'm from the deep south, and trust me, there are lots of "rednecks" who are NOT conservative Christians. I totally agree that Bush had a vast amount of support from Christians. However, "rednecks" (I assume you mean poor, rural, and educated people from the south) who are not Christian have almost always supported Democratic candidates. This election was no exception. Most of them supported Kerry. If cnn.com still has the state by state info posted, look at the counties in Tennessee. The rural, poor outlying counties (and inner city Nashville), were mostly won by Kerry. The suburbian counties surrounding the big cities (where the mostly education and wealthy live) were supporters of Bush by huge margins.

BTW - Are you an American?
I'm not American, but I don't see why that matters.

BTW, SORRY about insulting your education. That was over the line from me. Emotions running high and all that, you know?

With your other arguments, let's just agree to disagree ok?

I think we all need to take a step back and realise that it's not the end of the world.

CooCooCachoo
Nov 5th, 2004, 11:19 AM
People in rural areas care more about family values and are less liberal than people in the cities. They see Bush more as a family man and find Kerry too diplomatic probably. I think religion also plays a much greater role in those rural areas, so it's no surprise the votes went to Bush rather than Kerry :)

korben
Nov 5th, 2004, 11:56 AM
wrong link.. :(