2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThere's an asymmetrical perception issue between rural areas and big cities/metros
Specifically, between the least populated (and often, least in terms of population density) regions/counties/towns, and the large, densely populated, diverse, wealthy, and extremely culturally influential (if not essentially dominant) metro areas like those of New York, DC, Los Angeles/Southern California, the San Francisco Bay Area...basically, the East and West Coasts (with places in the interior like Chicago and maybe Denver also approaching that status).
The divide is not just one of cultural perspectives and perceptions of the other culture, it's asymmetrical in the sense that, while most people in America's metropolises (particularly the largest and most cosmopolitan ones) have little (if any) awareness of what life is like "out there" out in "the boonies" (other than crude media stereotypes - very often manufactured by people whom have never even set foot in a rural community (and have no desire to, much less ever live in such a community), rural Americans certainly know at least some of the thought/opinions/perspectives of the "city-slickers" - specifically, those of Hollywood, the mainstream news media, and other figures and institutions who, quite frankly, are ELITE. And rural people see the loudest, most influential voices in the media and the broader culture being almost entirely from large, wealthy, cosmopolitan, metropolitan, and LIBERAL areas (all of which seem to be correlated, certainly from the view of rural America) talk about rural people and their communities like they are authorities and experts on them - in spite of the fact that most of the media pundits are very far removed from "the country" - and deeply resent their snobbery, their lecturing, their acting like they know people they don't know (much less, respect), and all the rest of it.
This, IMHO, is a BIG reason for Clinton's very poor performance in so many rural counties in the US - even counties in which Obama won in both 2008 and 2012. While both big metropolitan and rural/small-town residents have many misconceptions regarding each other, the difference is that rural Americans actually do hear (and see) "big city folks" talk about different subjects (including rural America) - and on a daily basis, at that - while the converse is emphatically not true. Who's "uneducated " again?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
dawg
(10,728 posts)All I see on television are city slickers trying to bend over backwards to kiss our rural asses, call us the "heartland", call us the "real" Americans, and to make a thousand excuses for our unrepentant racism and misogyny.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Rural conservatives are the ones who are constantly judging "city slickers" for being more liberal (in general) and for supposedly having "sinful "lifestyles, to the point of forcing legislation that impede on the rights of city folk. Rural people seem to be the people who live in a bubble. This idea that city folk look down on rural folk and should learn to listen more to them, without also suggesting that perhaps rural folk should learn to listen to city folk, is simply condescending.
radius777
(3,814 posts)and not some 'liberal elite' that rural whites complain about - but working class people themselves - immigrants, poc, women, secular whites, etc, who tend to live in and around metro areas because that is where the jobs, schools and overall advancement are in this world.
the idea that we should somehow go back to some rural or industrial heartland focus is ridiculous, as it is technology more than anything else that has changed the game, those rural jobs and that way of life will never be the focus of America (and most other countries) ever again.
radius777
(3,814 posts)and their surrounding suburbs.. of people of color, immigrants, women, urban progressives, young people, suburban moderates, etc.
The old FDR Dem party that focused mainly on the white working class (WWC) at the expense of everyone else is long dead.
We need to do much better with WWC, but it likely won't be the overly conservative or religious rural whites, but the more secular and pragmatic ones, the types who voted for Bill Clinton, who was very good at talking about hot button social issues (like abortion) in a way that didn't offend many moderates and traditionalists.
But ultimately Dems are a metro party, and it makes more sense to build upon this and turn out our metro base, than pander to rural conservative who are at odds with everything modern America stands for
JI7
(90,535 posts)Republicans and they are the ones most likely to view the poorer rural types as less.
Would trump ever spend time on a personal level with many of those suppoerters ? I never saw him one on one the way hillary would with regular people across the country.
DeminPennswoods
(16,317 posts)We got into a discussion lamenting where all the good jobs went, i.e., mills and manufacturing and that jobs now don't pay much or come with many benefits. Then it was on to welfare and how not white, lazy people got all the benefits despite a member of this person's family getting SNAP/food stamps. The cuts to the SNAP program are just hitting now and this family member had her already meager allowance reduced even further. I sympathized and pointed out that the GOP legislature/congress was the entity that has caused this problem. But my words went in one ear and out the other. To this person it will always be "those other lazy people who know how to work the system to their benefit" that are the problem, not the Republicans.
JI7
(90,535 posts)is what it always goes back to.
if they see a minority who does well they think it was unfairly given to them and in turn taken away from a more deserving white person.
you can point to facts and there is a lot of stuff out there they can look up themselves. but as you say it goes in and out the ear .
I do feel for these folks. Most don't have an education past high school, maybe a certification in a service career, are employed in low wage/low benefit jobs, bounce around from job to job in the low wage economy always looking for something better and don't have a lot in the way of savings. I see their future - working well into their 60s and beyond and suffering the inevitable health problems like bad knees and cranky backs. They won't enjoy the happy and secure retirements of their parents and their kids will have even less. I'm sure in their hearts, they know this, too.
I do see the potential for a silver lining, though. Dems have a great chance to showcase the greed of America's top 1% ers at the confirmation hearings for Trump's cabinet picks. Maybe some eyes will be opened when the likes of DeVos and Ross get grilled on how they wrecked public education and bought and sold manufacturers soley to enrich themselves.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)...a large percentage of people born and raised in really small towns never travel more than 50 miles away from said town. In other words, many people never expose themselves to different points of view, and never go to college. The only exposure they get to the wider world is through TV (a lot of Fox News), radio and Internet.
People born and raised in suburbs and cities are much more likely to be exposed to a diversity of environments and viewpoints.
Yavin4
(36,389 posts)Rush Limbaugh broadcasts from Palm Springs in Florida.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,693 posts)They honestly think people are getting shot dead on every street corner.
My partner's sister had to call out a cousin that, on Facebook, wished Chicago would burn down during the upcoming World Series riots (that never happened).
My partner's stepdad was a retired pilot who drove a fully federally subsidized school bus picking up kids from rural homes probably financed with rural/farm loans with Romney signs in the front yard. He would just shake his head.
So tired of the pig headed ignorance and hate coming from rural voters who LOVE America but hate Americans and its government. These people have been coddled for too long.
There's a reason the "black Cadillac driving welfare queen" bullshit resonated with rural republican voters.
DeminPennswoods
(16,317 posts)That's right, 80% of Pennsylvania residents are born and die in the state. I was raised in western PA and growing up I thought Philadelphia was the enemy because that's all I ever heard. After college, the job I took landed me "behind enemy lines" as it were. Then I discovered what a great place Phila was and how it's by far the major economic engine in the state. It was wonderful to be around mostly thoughtful, educated people and a vibrant, diverse population. I've spoken to a few people who moved away and returned to this area and we all agree it was culture shock to move back among the insular, isolated and ignorant. Like, how could we have not seen this growing up?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I've lived in, or very near the boonies my whole life. I've never lived in a big city.
Right now, I live on the edge of a small city, and can see large cornfields from my house.
The people in the "boonies" where I live are extremely socially conservative. Many use the terms "fag" and "queer" openly. They refer to the black people on the south side of my small city as the n word, or occasionally "mud people." A few are poor. A few are rich. Most are in the upper end of middle class, driving massive brodozers. The only thing most of them care for environment about is the next harvest, (even if the live in the small towns... When the richer farmers do well, they do well). They think global warming is a hoax. Most of them heavily deride people on welfqre, but many of them are pulling in 5-figure crop subsidies. They are upset that their "religious freedom" is being attacked, but if you object to an explicitly Christian prayer at the school, you can get the fuck out.
That's what I know about "rural" America.
radius777
(3,814 posts)and "vote for class interests" is a laugh. These are the same people who fled the Dem party in droves to vote for Reagan, who told them that "tax and spend liberals" were giving all of their money to "welfare queens."
They don't view the world in terms of class or anything else, but basically just want to go back the 50's - the 1850's - to some type of white patriarchal fantasy world.
The Dems do need to reach out to white working class, but those who are more secular and pragmatic, i.e. those who live in/around metro areas and industrial towns.
Wounded Bear
(60,690 posts)quite frankly, the people from the rural areas do a lot of the condescension. I hear a lot of thinking that if we "city folk" would stock up on guns and go to church more often we'd be just fine.
Rural solutions don't work for the urban areas any more than urban solutions work in the country.
PufPuf23
(9,233 posts)church than urban Democratic liberals.
The Democratic party once had a strong component from rural agriculture, labor, and basic industry; not all were racist and rural people are not by definition uneducated nor stupid.
PufPuf23
(9,233 posts)The USA needs more strong liberal Democratic voices from rural areas that have national recognition for their wisdom.